An important question in information-seeking behavior is where people go for information and why information seekers prefer to use one source type rather than another when faced with an information-seeking task or need for information. Prior studies have paid little attention to contingent variables that could change the cost-benefit calculus in source use. They also defined source use in one way or the other, or considered source use as a monolithic construct. Through an empirical survey of 352 working professionals in Singapore, this study carried out a context-based investigation into source use by information seekers. Different measures of source use have been incorporated, and various contextual variables that could affect the use of source types have been identified. The findings suggest that source quality and access difficulty are important antecedents of source use, regardless of the source type. Moreover, seekers place more weight on source quality when the task is important. Other contextual factors, however, are generally less important to source use. Seekers also demonstrate a strong pecking order in the use of source types, with online information and face-to-face being the two most preferred types.

BackgroundCoronary heart disease (CHD) is the most prevalent type of cardiac disease among adults worldwide, including those in Singapore. Most of its risk factors, such as smoking, physical inactivity and high blood pressure, are preventable. mHealth has improved in the last decade, showing promising results in chronic disease prevention and health promotion worldwide. Our aim was to develop and examine the effect of a 4-week Smartphone-Based Coronary Heart Disease Prevention (SBCHDP) programme in improving awareness and knowledge of CHD, perceived stress as well as cardiac-related lifestyle behaviours in the working population of Singapore.MethodsThe smartphone app “Care4Heart” was developed as the main component of the programme. App content was reviewed and validated by a panel of experts, including two cardiologists and two experienced cardiology-trained nurses. A pilot randomised controlled trial was conducted. Eighty working people were recruited and randomised to either the intervention group (n = 40) or the control group (n = 40). The intervention group underwent a 4-week SBCHDP programme, whereas the control group were offered health promotion websites only. The participants’ CHD knowledge, perceived stress and behavioural risk factors were measured at baseline and on the 4th week using the Heart Disease Fact Questionnaire-2, Perceived Stress Scale, and Behavioural Risk Factor Surveillance System.ResultsAfter the SBCHDP programme, participants in the intervention group had a better awareness of CHD being the second leading cause of death in Singapore (X 2  = 6.486, p = 0.039), a better overall CHD knowledge level (t = 3.171, p = 0.002), and better behaviour concerning blood cholesterol control (X 2 = 4.54, p = 0.033) than participants in the control group.ConclusionThis pilot study partially confirmed the positive effects of the SBCHDP programme in improving awareness and knowledge of CHD among the working population. Due to the small sample size and short follow-up period, this study was underpowered to detect significant differences between groups. A full-scale longitudinal study is required in the future to confirm the effectiveness of the SBCHDP programme.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12955-017-0623-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Despite the seemingly widespread and growing attention to the notion of 'context' in information seeking, the concept remains ill-defined and inconsistently applied. There isn't any success in defining: What context really means? What are the boundaries of context? What constitutes the 'core' (main factors that lead to information seeking behavior) and what constitutes the 'surrounding' circumstances (or context)? Where do we draw the line between this core and the context? Or does this context subsume the core? The contribution of this theoretical study will be to help towards delineating the boundaries of context through a IntroductionIn the last few years, the context of information seeking is receiving increased attention 1 , along with equivalent notions like 'situation', 'setting', 'environment ', etc. Cool (2001) attributes this to the thinking that 'in order to better understand information-seeking behavior (ISB) and information retrieval (IR) interaction, greater attention needs to be directed to the information spaces within which these activities are embedded' (p.5). However, despite the seemingly widespread and growing attention, the concept remains ill-defined and inconsistently applied ( McCreadie & Rice (1999 p.58) define context as the 'larger picture in which the potential user operates; the larger picture in which the information system is developed and operates, and potential information exists', whereas situation is seen as 'the particular set of circumstances from which a need for information arises.' Courtright (2007) sees context as including those elements that have a more lasting and predictable influence on information [behavior] than situation, whereas situation is seen as a potential part of context. Dervin (1997 p.14-15), through a 3-tiered categorization of context, argues that for many, 'context has the potential of being virtually anything that is not defined as the phenomenon of interest…a kind of container in which the phenomenon resides.' A second group struggles with trying to determine which of an 'inexhaustible list of factors' will be included in context.

No abstract

Aim:The aim of this study was to develop and examine the effectiveness of a 4-week Mobile Health (mHealth) programme using the smartphone app Care4Heart on awareness, knowledge, perceived stress, and a heart-related lifestyle among working population in Singapore. Design:A quasi-experimental single group pretest and repeated post-test design.Methods: A total of 160 nonhealth-related working adults were recruited from February 2016-April 2016. The Care4Heart app was installed on the participants' phones. Outcome measures, including the Heart Disease Fact Questionnaire-2, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, and the Perceived Stress Scale were collected online at baseline, 4th week, and 6th month from baseline. Results:Compared with the baseline, the participants had significantly higher total mean scores for awareness and knowledge of coronary heart disease (CHD) after study intervention at 4 weeks and 6 months from baseline. However, there were no significant differences in perceived stress levels and heart-related lifestyle behaviours before and after the intervention. Conclusions:The study contributed some evidence that the mHealth app helped to improve awareness and knowledge of CHD. Impact: Coronary heart disease remains one of the major causes of death and disability. It imposes a heavy financial burden on working adults. However, working adults were less able to identify the risk factors and adopt healthy lifestyles due to gaps in knowledge and awareness. This study demonstrated some effects of a mHealth programme in improving awareness and knowledge of CHD among the working population. mHealth provides a potential avenue for primary prevention of CHD. K E Y W O R D Sawareness, coronary heart disease, heart-related lifestyle, knowledge, mHealth, nursing, perceived stress Trial registration The study has been registered with ClinicalTrial.gov. The trial registration number is NCT03744650.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract