Assessing the Credibility of Health Information on the Web: Does Health Literacy Play a Role?
|
If you are the presenter of this abstract (or if you cite this abstract in a talk or on a poster), please show the QR code in your slide or poster (QR code contains this URL). |
Abstract
Background
Consumer online health information seeking has dramatically increased in the last two decades. The quality of online health information, however, is still questionable, making the trustworthiness of online health information a “hot topic†in both research and medical practice. Guidelines and quality criteria for online health information have been developed, but surprisingly little attention has been paid to how consumers, in particular people with low health literacy, evaluate the credibility of online health information. Despite differences in how people with different levels of health literacy seek, find, and use online health information are well documented in the scientific literature, little is known about the role people’s health literacy plays in their assessment of the credibility of online health information, and in particular on their choice of strategies or criteria to assess it.
Objective
The main aim of this study is to review existing evidence in order to understand if and how health literacy plays a role in the assessment of the credibility of online information.
Methods
Five academic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Communication and Mass-media Complete) were systematically searched for peer-reviewed publications describing differences in the evaluation of the credibility of online health information between people with different literacy levels or focusing specifically on low-literacy populations.
Results
Results presented in the included articles provide evidence of the fact that differences in health literacy are related to both overall differences in the evaluation of the credibility of online health information (e.g., when compared to other sources), and reliance on different evaluation strategies. Additionally, and most interestingly, some of the evaluation criteria on which low-literate people seem to rely – for instance the ranking of the website among the results of a Google search – do not correspond to the established quality criteria that can be found in the published guidelines.
Conclusions
Public health officials and healthcare providers should devote particular attention to the online health information seeking behavior of low-literacy citizens and provide them with targeted advice on strategies to correctly assess the quality the information they find online. At the same time further scholarly research is needed to identify effective ways to increase the consumers’ online health literacy.
Consumer online health information seeking has dramatically increased in the last two decades. The quality of online health information, however, is still questionable, making the trustworthiness of online health information a “hot topic†in both research and medical practice. Guidelines and quality criteria for online health information have been developed, but surprisingly little attention has been paid to how consumers, in particular people with low health literacy, evaluate the credibility of online health information. Despite differences in how people with different levels of health literacy seek, find, and use online health information are well documented in the scientific literature, little is known about the role people’s health literacy plays in their assessment of the credibility of online health information, and in particular on their choice of strategies or criteria to assess it.
Objective
The main aim of this study is to review existing evidence in order to understand if and how health literacy plays a role in the assessment of the credibility of online information.
Methods
Five academic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Communication and Mass-media Complete) were systematically searched for peer-reviewed publications describing differences in the evaluation of the credibility of online health information between people with different literacy levels or focusing specifically on low-literacy populations.
Results
Results presented in the included articles provide evidence of the fact that differences in health literacy are related to both overall differences in the evaluation of the credibility of online health information (e.g., when compared to other sources), and reliance on different evaluation strategies. Additionally, and most interestingly, some of the evaluation criteria on which low-literate people seem to rely – for instance the ranking of the website among the results of a Google search – do not correspond to the established quality criteria that can be found in the published guidelines.
Conclusions
Public health officials and healthcare providers should devote particular attention to the online health information seeking behavior of low-literacy citizens and provide them with targeted advice on strategies to correctly assess the quality the information they find online. At the same time further scholarly research is needed to identify effective ways to increase the consumers’ online health literacy.
Medicine 2.0® is happy to support and promote other conferences and workshops in this area. Contact us to produce, disseminate and promote your conference or workshop under this label and in this event series. In addition, we are always looking for hosts of future World Congresses. Medicine 2.0® is a registered trademark of JMIR Publications Inc., the leading academic ehealth publisher.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.