SynthesisHealth promotion international2025
Examining the relationship between health literacy and eHealth literacy in adult populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Health promotion international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Associations of eHealth Literacy with Diabetes Self-Efficacy and Glycemic Parameters in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes and Prediabetes: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Low musculoskeletal health literacy is associated with inferior outcomes in total shoulder arthroplasty.JSES international · 2026Article
- Online Health-Seeking Behavior Among Primary Caregivers of Children with Chronic Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of eHealth Literacy, Caregiver Characteristics, and Child Clinical Context.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite their conceptual similarities and importance for effective health management, the relationship between health literacy and eHealth literacy remains poorly understood. This systematic review investigated the statistical association between health literacy and eHealth literacy in adults, along with study-level moderators and biopsychosocial correlates. CINAHL, Embase, Emcare, PubMed, ProQuest, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched until January 2025. Methodological reporting quality (QualSyst Checklist) was assessed and between-study heterogeneity explored using random and mixed-effects modeling. Twenty-three observational studies (N = 25 505 participants), all characterized by high methodological quality, were included. A weak positive relationship between overall health literacy and eHealth literacy was identified [r = 0.29, CI (0.21, 0.37)], with Category 2/comprehensive measures of health literacy correlating more strongly with eHealth literacy than Category 1/functional measures. Individual-level factors, including higher educational attainment, economic advantage, positive health behaviors, strong self-efficacy, and the ability to use digital resources were consistently linked to higher health literacy and eHealth literacy. The findings suggest that health literacy and eHealth literacy should continue to be researched in tandem to understand their impact on health outcomes in the digital age. Further research is also needed to understand how the surrounding environment, together with individual factors such as age and cultural background, influences the development of health literacy and eHealth literacy. Such studies are crucial for addressing disparities and enhancing access to health information and services.
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.