ArticlePLOS digital health2025
Optimising the provision of health information for older adults across paper and screen formats - A requirement study with content producers and consumers.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bridging the Communication Gap: Comparing Digital Tools and Traditional Methods in Post-Extraction Care Delivery.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Hypertension management profiles in Chinese adults aged 60 years and older.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The global shift toward digital health communication presents both opportunities and challenges for older adults, whose populations is expanding rapidly. This study explored how older adults and health content producers engage with health information across paper and digital formats, and assessed the potential of hybrid approaches such as augmented paper. Two qualitative studies were conducted in Surrey, UK: focus groups with older adults (n = 9) and interviews with public health professionals (n = 6). Data were analysed through content and thematic analysis to identify user requirements. Findings show that older adults continue to value printed materials for familiarity and reliability, but turn to digital formats for timeliness and convenience. Trust in online content, ease of use, and device compatibility emerged as central concerns shaping engagement. Content producers echoed these challenges, highlighting cost constraints and the need for accessible, multi-format materials. Both stakeholder groups favoured app-free connections between print and digital content, with QR codes preferred for their simplicity, familiarity, and avoidance of app installation. Participants also emphasised the importance of multimodal presentation (e.g., text, video, audio) and options to self-print key materials. While based on a small, UK-specific sample, the study highlights design implications for inclusive health communication. Hybrid solutions that combine print with carefully curated digital resources can reduce barriers linked to trust and usability, and extend access for older adults with varied levels of digital confidence. These insights provide actionable guidance for public health organisations and policymakers seeking to balance cost-effectiveness with accessibility. Broader testing in more diverse populations is recommended to refine these strategies and ensure equitable health communication worldwide. These findings underline the importance of designing hybrid health communication strategies that are not only user-friendly but also equitable, supporting the goals of the WHO Decade of Healthy Ageing by promoting inclusive access to reliable health information for older adults worldwide.
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.