从等级排斥到参与者主导的包容:卫生信息扫盲定性研究议程

IF 2.4 3区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Alison Hicks , Vicky Grant , Catherine Jenkins
{"title":"从等级排斥到参与者主导的包容:卫生信息扫盲定性研究议程","authors":"Alison Hicks ,&nbsp;Vicky Grant ,&nbsp;Catherine Jenkins","doi":"10.1016/j.lisr.2024.101295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Health information literacy links people to the information sources and ways of knowing that they need to make informed decisions about wellbeing. Qualitative research methods provide a powerful way to centre how people use information to learn about health as well as the conditions and social structures that enable and constrain information practice. This approach challenges health information literacy's more traditional focus on the measurement of normative, approved skills. Collaborative enquiry analysis of three recent studies into critical health literacy and children, chronic illness (irritable bowel syndrome) and vaccine hesitancy establishes a research agenda for qualitative health information literacy research. Producing four themes, including positioning information settings as health literate organisations, literacies for life, scaling up infrastructure and empowerment, the research agenda outlines directions for future theoretical, practical, and methodological health information literacy research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47618,"journal":{"name":"Library & Information Science Research","volume":"46 2","pages":"Article 101295"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From hierarchies of exclusion to participant-led inclusion: A qualitative research agenda for health information literacy\",\"authors\":\"Alison Hicks ,&nbsp;Vicky Grant ,&nbsp;Catherine Jenkins\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.lisr.2024.101295\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Health information literacy links people to the information sources and ways of knowing that they need to make informed decisions about wellbeing. Qualitative research methods provide a powerful way to centre how people use information to learn about health as well as the conditions and social structures that enable and constrain information practice. This approach challenges health information literacy's more traditional focus on the measurement of normative, approved skills. Collaborative enquiry analysis of three recent studies into critical health literacy and children, chronic illness (irritable bowel syndrome) and vaccine hesitancy establishes a research agenda for qualitative health information literacy research. Producing four themes, including positioning information settings as health literate organisations, literacies for life, scaling up infrastructure and empowerment, the research agenda outlines directions for future theoretical, practical, and methodological health information literacy research.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47618,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Library & Information Science Research\",\"volume\":\"46 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 101295\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Library & Information Science Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740818824000161\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Library & Information Science Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740818824000161","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

健康信息素养将人们与他们所需的信息来源和认知方式联系起来,使他们能够就健康问题做出明智的决定。定性研究方法提供了一种强有力的方法,可以集中研究人们如何利用信息来了解健康知识,以及促成和制约信息实践的条件和社会结构。这种方法挑战了健康信息素养更注重衡量规范、认可技能的传统做法。通过对近期三项研究的合作探究分析,即关键健康素养与儿童、慢性病(肠易激综合征)和疫苗犹豫,为定性健康信息素养研究确立了研究议程。该研究议程提出了四个主题,包括将信息环境定位为健康素养组织、生活素养、扩大基础设施和赋权,为未来的健康信息素养理论、实践和方法研究指明了方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From hierarchies of exclusion to participant-led inclusion: A qualitative research agenda for health information literacy

Health information literacy links people to the information sources and ways of knowing that they need to make informed decisions about wellbeing. Qualitative research methods provide a powerful way to centre how people use information to learn about health as well as the conditions and social structures that enable and constrain information practice. This approach challenges health information literacy's more traditional focus on the measurement of normative, approved skills. Collaborative enquiry analysis of three recent studies into critical health literacy and children, chronic illness (irritable bowel syndrome) and vaccine hesitancy establishes a research agenda for qualitative health information literacy research. Producing four themes, including positioning information settings as health literate organisations, literacies for life, scaling up infrastructure and empowerment, the research agenda outlines directions for future theoretical, practical, and methodological health information literacy research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Library & Information Science Research
Library & Information Science Research INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
6.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: Library & Information Science Research, a cross-disciplinary and refereed journal, focuses on the research process in library and information science as well as research findings and, where applicable, their practical applications and significance. All papers are subject to a double-blind reviewing process.
×
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