Using Health Information Resources for People With Cognitive Impairment (digiDEM Bayern): Registry-Based Cohort Study.

IF 2 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Florian Weidinger, Nikolas Dietzel, Elmar Graessel, Hans-Ulrich Prokosch, Peter Kolominsky-Rabas
{"title":"Using Health Information Resources for People With Cognitive Impairment (digiDEM Bayern): Registry-Based Cohort Study.","authors":"Florian Weidinger, Nikolas Dietzel, Elmar Graessel, Hans-Ulrich Prokosch, Peter Kolominsky-Rabas","doi":"10.2196/54460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dementia is a growing global health challenge with significant economic and social implications. Underdiagnosis of dementia is prevalent due to a lack of knowledge and understanding among the general population. Enhancing dementia literacy through improved health information-seeking behavior is crucial for the self-determined management of the disease by those affected. Understanding the relationship between dementia literacy, health information-seeking behavior, and the use of various information sources among individuals with cognitive impairment is of high importance in this context.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to analyze the relevance of different sources of health information from the perspective of people with cognitive impairment, while also evaluating differences based on age, gender, and disease progression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study is part of the ongoing project \"Digital Dementia Registry Bavaria - digiDEM Bayern.\" The Digital Dementia Registry Bavaria is a multicenter, prospective, longitudinal register study in Bavaria, Germany. People with cognitive impairment rated several information sources by using Likert scales with the values unimportant (1) to very important (5). Data were analyzed descriptively, and multiple 2-sample, 2-tailed t tests were used to evaluate differences by cognitive status and gender and using multiple one-way ANOVA to evaluate differences by age group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data of 924 people with cognitive impairment (531 with dementia, 393 with mild cognitive impairment) were evaluated. The most relevant health information sources were \"Personal visit to a medical professional\" (mean 3.9, SD 1.1) and \"Family / Friends\" (mean 3.9, SD 1.2). \"Internet\" was 1 of the 2 lowest-rated information sources by people with cognitive impairment (mean 1.6, SD 1.1), with nearly three-quarters (684/924, 74%) of the participants rating the source as unimportant. The age-specific analyses showed significant differences for the sources \"Internet\" (F2,921=61.23; P<.001), \"Courses / Lectures\" (F2,921=18.88; P<.001), and \"Family / Friends\" (F2,921=6.27; P=.002) for the 3 defined age groups. There were several significant differences between people with mild cognitive impairment and dementia whereby the first group evaluated most sources higher, such as \"Internet\" (mean difference=0.6; t640=7.52; P<.001). The only sources rated higher by the dementia group were \"TV / Radio\" and \"Family / Friends,\" with none of them showing significant differences. Gender-specific analyses showed women with cognitive impairment valuing every evaluated source higher than men apart from \"Internet\" (mean difference=0.4; t685=4.97; P<.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>To enhance health and dementia literacy, the best way to communicate health information to people with cognitive impairment is through interpersonal contact with medical professionals and their friends and family. Slight changes in valuation should be considered as the medical condition progresses, along with variations by age and gender. In particular, the evaluation and use of the internet are dependent on these factors. Further research is needed to capture potential changes in the valuation of the internet as a health information source.</p>","PeriodicalId":14841,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Formative Research","volume":"9 ","pages":"e54460"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Formative Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/54460","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dementia is a growing global health challenge with significant economic and social implications. Underdiagnosis of dementia is prevalent due to a lack of knowledge and understanding among the general population. Enhancing dementia literacy through improved health information-seeking behavior is crucial for the self-determined management of the disease by those affected. Understanding the relationship between dementia literacy, health information-seeking behavior, and the use of various information sources among individuals with cognitive impairment is of high importance in this context.

Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the relevance of different sources of health information from the perspective of people with cognitive impairment, while also evaluating differences based on age, gender, and disease progression.

Methods: This study is part of the ongoing project "Digital Dementia Registry Bavaria - digiDEM Bayern." The Digital Dementia Registry Bavaria is a multicenter, prospective, longitudinal register study in Bavaria, Germany. People with cognitive impairment rated several information sources by using Likert scales with the values unimportant (1) to very important (5). Data were analyzed descriptively, and multiple 2-sample, 2-tailed t tests were used to evaluate differences by cognitive status and gender and using multiple one-way ANOVA to evaluate differences by age group.

Results: Data of 924 people with cognitive impairment (531 with dementia, 393 with mild cognitive impairment) were evaluated. The most relevant health information sources were "Personal visit to a medical professional" (mean 3.9, SD 1.1) and "Family / Friends" (mean 3.9, SD 1.2). "Internet" was 1 of the 2 lowest-rated information sources by people with cognitive impairment (mean 1.6, SD 1.1), with nearly three-quarters (684/924, 74%) of the participants rating the source as unimportant. The age-specific analyses showed significant differences for the sources "Internet" (F2,921=61.23; P<.001), "Courses / Lectures" (F2,921=18.88; P<.001), and "Family / Friends" (F2,921=6.27; P=.002) for the 3 defined age groups. There were several significant differences between people with mild cognitive impairment and dementia whereby the first group evaluated most sources higher, such as "Internet" (mean difference=0.6; t640=7.52; P<.001). The only sources rated higher by the dementia group were "TV / Radio" and "Family / Friends," with none of them showing significant differences. Gender-specific analyses showed women with cognitive impairment valuing every evaluated source higher than men apart from "Internet" (mean difference=0.4; t685=4.97; P<.001).

Conclusions: To enhance health and dementia literacy, the best way to communicate health information to people with cognitive impairment is through interpersonal contact with medical professionals and their friends and family. Slight changes in valuation should be considered as the medical condition progresses, along with variations by age and gender. In particular, the evaluation and use of the internet are dependent on these factors. Further research is needed to capture potential changes in the valuation of the internet as a health information source.

认知障碍患者使用健康信息资源(巴伐利亚 digiDEM):基于登记簿的队列研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JMIR Formative Research
JMIR Formative Research Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
579
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信