ArticleHealth promotion international2026
Evaluating digital health literacy interventions for adults 45+ years: a scoping review.
Article in Health promotion international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Digital health literacy is increasingly vital for equitable healthcare, yet adults aged 45+ may face age-related and psychosocial barriers that limit digital engagement. Interventions targeting these barriers are crucial. This review mapped the design and effectiveness of current digital health literacy interventions for adults 45+ years, assessing how they addressed biological, psychological, and social (biopsychosocial) dimensions and key outcomes. The review followed Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Five databases were searched for English-language studies published between 2015 and 2025. Twenty-four studies met inclusion criteria, comprising randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, qualitative research, and systematic and scoping reviews. Data were synthesized and thematically mapped against biopsychosocial dimensions and effectiveness outcomes, including competence, critical thinking, empowerment, sustained engagement, and health outcomes. Most interventions were associated with improvements in digital skills, confidence, and self-efficacy, particularly when delivered face-to-face, in small groups, or through blended formats. However, most focused on psychological factors, with biological and social dimensions addressed inconsistently. Only one study incorporated all three biopsychosocial dimensions, and none assessed all effectiveness outcomes simultaneously. There was limited evidence for improvements in sustained engagement, critical thinking, and longer-term health outcomes following intervention. Digital health literacy interventions for adults aged 45+ years may therefore benefit from extending beyond a focus on technical skills to address the broader range of age-related biopsychosocial barriers. In this context, a biopsychosocial-digital framework appears to offer a more comprehensive foundation for the design and evaluation of interventions aimed at supporting meaningful and sustained health outcomes.
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.