电子健康素养和对健康信息源的信任。

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Abdullah Alhewiti
{"title":"电子健康素养和对健康信息源的信任。","authors":"Abdullah Alhewiti","doi":"10.3390/healthcare13060616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The spread of health-related information across the internet necessitates an evaluation of public eHealth literacy, trust in different health information sources, including healthcare providers, and how eHealth literacy is related to trust in different sources.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>407 individuals participated in a web-based survey in the Tabuk region of Saudi Arabia. Univariate analysis was used to evaluate the relationships between eHealth literacy and demographic variables, and multiple linear regression was used to measure the relationship between eHealth literacy and trust in health information sources after adjustment for demographic factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average eHealth literacy of the respondents was 27.17 out of 40. eHealth literacy levels were higher among females, younger age groups, those in the higher-education category, and those with a chronic disease or currently on medication. For 51.9% of participants, physicians and healthcare workers were their main source of health information, while 40% considered the internet their main source. None of the study participants perceived physicians and healthcare workers as untrustworthy, and social media was the least trusted source. eHealth literacy was not related to trust in physicians and health workers but was positively associated with trust in specialized health websites and negatively associated with trust in social media.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings suggest that the public tends to prefer and trust physicians and other healthcare workers as a primary source of health information, regardless of their eHealth literacy levels. A higher eHealth literacy level was associated with trust in specialized health websites and distrust in social media.</p>","PeriodicalId":12977,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare","volume":"13 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11942269/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"eHealth Literacy and Trust in Health Information Sources.\",\"authors\":\"Abdullah Alhewiti\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/healthcare13060616\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The spread of health-related information across the internet necessitates an evaluation of public eHealth literacy, trust in different health information sources, including healthcare providers, and how eHealth literacy is related to trust in different sources.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>407 individuals participated in a web-based survey in the Tabuk region of Saudi Arabia. Univariate analysis was used to evaluate the relationships between eHealth literacy and demographic variables, and multiple linear regression was used to measure the relationship between eHealth literacy and trust in health information sources after adjustment for demographic factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average eHealth literacy of the respondents was 27.17 out of 40. eHealth literacy levels were higher among females, younger age groups, those in the higher-education category, and those with a chronic disease or currently on medication. For 51.9% of participants, physicians and healthcare workers were their main source of health information, while 40% considered the internet their main source. None of the study participants perceived physicians and healthcare workers as untrustworthy, and social media was the least trusted source. eHealth literacy was not related to trust in physicians and health workers but was positively associated with trust in specialized health websites and negatively associated with trust in social media.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings suggest that the public tends to prefer and trust physicians and other healthcare workers as a primary source of health information, regardless of their eHealth literacy levels. A higher eHealth literacy level was associated with trust in specialized health websites and distrust in social media.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12977,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Healthcare\",\"volume\":\"13 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11942269/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13060616\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13060616","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:健康相关信息在互联网上的传播需要对公共电子健康素养、对不同健康信息源(包括医疗保健提供者)的信任以及电子健康素养与对不同来源的信任之间的关系进行评估。方法:407个人参加了沙特阿拉伯Tabuk地区的网络调查。采用单因素分析评估电子健康素养与人口统计学变量之间的关系,在调整人口统计学因素后,采用多元线性回归测量电子健康素养与健康信息源信任之间的关系。结果:40名受访者的平均电子健康素养为27.17。女性、年轻年龄组、受过高等教育的人群以及患有慢性病或目前正在接受药物治疗的人群的电子健康素养水平较高。51.9%的参与者认为医生和卫生保健工作者是他们的主要健康信息来源,而40%的人认为互联网是他们的主要来源。没有一个研究参与者认为医生和医护人员不值得信任,社交媒体是最不值得信任的来源。电子健康素养与对医生和卫生工作者的信任无关,但与对专业健康网站的信任呈正相关,与对社交媒体的信任呈负相关。结论:研究结果表明,无论公众的电子卫生素养水平如何,他们都倾向于将医生和其他卫生保健工作者作为卫生信息的主要来源。较高的电子健康素养水平与对专业健康网站的信任和对社交媒体的不信任有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
eHealth Literacy and Trust in Health Information Sources.

Introduction: The spread of health-related information across the internet necessitates an evaluation of public eHealth literacy, trust in different health information sources, including healthcare providers, and how eHealth literacy is related to trust in different sources.

Methods: 407 individuals participated in a web-based survey in the Tabuk region of Saudi Arabia. Univariate analysis was used to evaluate the relationships between eHealth literacy and demographic variables, and multiple linear regression was used to measure the relationship between eHealth literacy and trust in health information sources after adjustment for demographic factors.

Results: The average eHealth literacy of the respondents was 27.17 out of 40. eHealth literacy levels were higher among females, younger age groups, those in the higher-education category, and those with a chronic disease or currently on medication. For 51.9% of participants, physicians and healthcare workers were their main source of health information, while 40% considered the internet their main source. None of the study participants perceived physicians and healthcare workers as untrustworthy, and social media was the least trusted source. eHealth literacy was not related to trust in physicians and health workers but was positively associated with trust in specialized health websites and negatively associated with trust in social media.

Conclusions: The findings suggest that the public tends to prefer and trust physicians and other healthcare workers as a primary source of health information, regardless of their eHealth literacy levels. A higher eHealth literacy level was associated with trust in specialized health websites and distrust in social media.

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
Healthcare
Healthcare Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: Healthcare (ISSN 2227-9032) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal (free for readers), which publishes original theoretical and empirical work in the interdisciplinary area of all aspects of medicine and health care research. Healthcare publishes Original Research Articles, Reviews, Case Reports, Research Notes and Short Communications. We encourage researchers to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. For theoretical papers, full details of proofs must be provided so that the results can be checked; for experimental papers, full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Additionally, electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculations, experimental procedure, etc., can be deposited along with the publication as “Supplementary Material”.
×
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