ArticleDigital health
Exploration of digital health literacy among community members and healthcare teams in the deep south: A quasi-experimental study.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Associations between psychological distress and financial hardship for patients with cancer receiving care in Alabama.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Article
- Strategies for optimizing clinical trial recruitment: perspectives among patients with breast cancer.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- Technology Access, Digital Literacy, and Enrollment Support Preferences in a Federally Qualified Health Center: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Telehealth-Readiness, Healthcare Access, and Cardiovascular Health in the Deep South: A Spatial Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Given increasing technology reliance, there is a need for a deeper understanding of individual and community-level comfort with technology as it pertains to basic and more complex healthcare-related skills. Methods: The objective of this quasi-experimental study was to engage participants in conversations about digital health literacy to facilitate awareness and to compare digital health literacy for community members, healthcare providers, non-clinical navigators, and community health advisors and county coordinators (henceforth referred to as CHAs) in the Deep South (AL, MS, FL). Interactive community conversations on digital health literacy were given in community (n = 16) and clinical (n = 5) settings. Participants completed pre- and post- surveys assessing personal comfort performing technological tasks on a 5-point scale. Mixed models estimated both within- and between-role changes in self-reported comfort. Results: Of 248 participants, 56% were community members, 18% healthcare providers, 17% CHAs, and 8% non-clinical navigators. Community members had the lowest personal comfort performing every task assessed (all p < .05). In the pre-test, the largest differences in reported personal comfort performing tasks were seen for basic skills including scanning QR codes (mean comfort score: community members 2.7 [SD 1.5] vs. non-clinical navigator 4.5 [1.0], p < .001) and sharing a website (mean comfort score: community members 2.9 [SD 1.6] vs. non-clinical navigator 4.5 [1.0], p < .001). Pre- vs. post-community conversation, community members experienced significant increases in their personal comfort scanning QR codes (β=0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.0), creating an online account (general use) (β=0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.6), and using a smartphone (β=0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.5). Conclusions: As technological advances continue to be implemented, gaps in digital health literacy must be addressed. Non-clinical navigators may play a future role in teaching patients technology skills.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.