Exploring the Readiness for Digital Health Literacy Transformation and Intervention Preferences From the Perspectives of Patients With Cancer, Caregivers, and Health Care Professionals: Qualitative Interview Study.

Background: Technology is changing the way the world communicates and how we learn, remember, and transform information. The ascendancy of the internet has dramatically altered the landscape of health information access and seeking behaviors. This transformation is embodied by the concept of digital health literacy (DHL) and the need for interventions that improve DHL. Objective: This study aims to explore readiness for DHL transformation and intervention preferences from the perspectives of patients with cancer, caregivers, and health care professionals. Methods: We conducted semistructured telephone and on-site interviews with 19 patients with cancer, 6 caregivers, and 10 oncology health care professionals. Purposive sampling was used to recruit the participants. We followed the 7 stages of the Framework Method analysis: transcription, familiarization with the interview, coding, developing a working analytical framework, applying the analytical framework, charting the data into the framework matrix, and interpreting the data. This was used to investigate participants' beliefs about technology adoption, their preferences for DHL training, and the facilitating conditions for adopting such training. We used a hybrid deductive-inductive approach to data analysis, starting with a priori themes and allowing emergent themes to develop as the analysis progressed. The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology informed our data generation and analysis. Results: The following 6 themes emerged from the analysis: introducing technology-driven solutions, simplifying technology training materials, providing user-friendly training materials, patient-centered care, partnership, and addressing cultural and linguistic barriers. We found that patients with cancer and caregivers were self-sufficient and motivated to use new technology to improve their DHL; however, health care professionals were concerned about the reliability of online information. By mapping interview themes to the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, we identified specific recommendations for the creation of a DHL intervention: content should be concise, easy to understand, and web-based; content should include training on how to identify reliable cancer information; patients would like to be involved in content creation in addition to medical and government stakeholders; and content should be accessible in multiple languages. Conclusions: Patients with cancer and their caregivers were motivated to use modern technology to improve cancer DHL, despite the quality issues raised by health care professionals. The participants' preferences regarding DHL training align with the innovative microlearning pedagogy. Microlearning could leverage technology to deliver tailored DHL training for patients with cancer. Collaboration with multiple medical and nonmedical stakeholders could facilitate the delivery of cancer DHL training. Future work should focus on designing and assessing the feasibility of implementing a microlearning-based DHL training program that involves end users and diverse stakeholders.