eHealth literacy among older adults living with cancer and their caregivers: A scoping review

Verma, Ridhi; Saldanha, Conchita; Ellis, Ursula; Sattar, Schroder; Haase, Kristen

doi:10.1016/j.jgo.2021.11.008

Cited by 41 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Others determined that the information was credible if the website provided the information that the patient or surrogate seeker was searching for. Similar findings have been discussed in the scoping review by Verm et al [ 40 ], which found that eHealth literacy was positively correlated with surrogate seekers’ strategies enacted such as seeking a second opinion, awareness of treatment options, shared decision-making, and trust in the health care system. An important factor to consider, moving forward, when analyzing how people appraise and evaluate the credibility of web-based health information includes several cognitive biases such as confirmation bias.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Comparing Transactional eHealth Literacy of Individuals With Cancer and Surrogate Information Seekers: Mixed Methods Study

Vasquez¹,

Bylund²,

Alpert³

et al. 2022

JMIR Form Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The number of adults entering higher-risk age groups for receiving a cancer diagnosis is rising, with predicted numbers of cancer cases expected to increase by nearly 50% by 2050. Living with cancer puts exceptional burdens on individuals and families during treatment and survivorship, including how they navigate their relationships with one another. One role that a member of a support network may enact is that of a surrogate seeker, who seeks information in an informal capacity on behalf of others. Individuals with cancer and surrogate seekers often use the internet to learn about cancer, but differences in their skills and strategies have received little empirical attention. Objective This study aimed to examine the eHealth literacy of individuals with cancer and surrogate information seekers, including an investigation of how each group evaluates the credibility of web-based cancer information. As a secondary aim, we sought to explore the differences that exist between individuals with cancer and surrogate seekers pertaining to eHealth literacies and sociodemographic contexts. Methods Between October 2019 and January 2020, we conducted a web-based survey of 282 individuals with cancer (n=185) and surrogate seekers (n=97). We used hierarchical linear regression analyses to explore differences in functional, communicative, critical, and translational eHealth literacy between individuals with cancer and surrogate seekers using the Transactional eHealth Literacy Instrument. Using a convergent, parallel mixed methods design, we also conducted a thematic content analysis of an open-ended survey response to qualitatively examine how each group evaluates web-based cancer information. Results eHealth literacy scores did not differ between individuals with cancer and surrogate seekers, even after adjusting for sociodemographic variables. Individuals with cancer and surrogate seekers consider the credibility of web-based cancer information based on its channel (eg, National Institutes of Health). However, in evaluating web-based information, surrogate seekers were more likely than individuals with cancer to consider the presence and quality of scientific references supporting the information. Individuals with cancer were more likely than surrogate seekers to cross-reference other websites and web-based sources to establish consensus. Conclusions Web-based cancer information accessibility and evaluation procedures differ among individuals with cancer and surrogate seekers and should be considered in future efforts to design web-based cancer education interventions. Future studies may also benefit from more stratified recruitment approaches and account for additional contextual factors to better understand the unique circumstances experienced within this population.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Comparing Transactional eHealth Literacy of Individuals With Cancer and Surrogate Information Seekers: Mixed Methods Study

Vasquez¹,

Bylund²,

Alpert³

et al. 2022

JMIR Form Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Current data from OECD describes that European individuals have significant difficulties accessing and appraising health information from those published in the media [ 37 ]. A scoping review involving caregivers of people with cancer also stated that the digitalization of health could be identified as a barrier to health literacy development, mainly to individuals with low socioeconomic status and educational level, as well as reduced familiarity with technology [ 39 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Informal Caregivers’ Health Literacy in Lisbon, Portugal: A Profile for Health Promotion Prioritization

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health literacy (HL) allows people to access, understand and evaluate health information. Informal caregivers’ levels of HL may impact long-term care outcomes. ‘Informal caregivers’ profile in Lisbon county: a health community approach’ is a nurse-led research project aiming to assess informal caregivers’ health literacy and associated factors in Lisbon county, as well as to foster the development of a local-specific health literacy strategy. A survey to identify a health/social caregiver profile, including questions about HL (HLS-EU-PT), was submitted to a representative sample of carers. Descriptive and bivariate inferential analysis was developed. Informal caregivers’ level of HL was mostly sufficient (n = 99, 38%). More than 60% of caregivers have limited HL regarding health promotion. ‘Access’, ‘Appraisal’ and ‘Use’ are the information processing stages with lower mean scores of HL. Carers with low HL levels appear to be older and to have less education, low knowledge of community resources and decreased wellbeing (p < 0.05). A strategy focused on health promotion-related HL through primary care resources can potentially improve caregivers’ knowledge, competencies and motivation, as well as health system sustainability. Reported HLS-EU-PT scores deserve special attention. Future work should emphasize the role of HL-associated factors and health outcomes for caregivers and cared-for persons.

show abstract

“…In an effort to synthesize the evidence for this relatively new area of research of mHealth related to health literacy, a scoping review was planned. At the time of this scoping review, many review studies related to health literacy for mHealth or eHealth had been published with significant variation in topics such as the examination of health literacy levels of specific apps (14,15); the effects of mHealth-based interventions on health literacy (16,17); and discussions on health literacy of mobile apps for cancer (18,19), diabetes (20), heart disease (21,22), chronic pain management (23), and mental health (24,25). While previous reviews have explored health literacy in the context of mHealth or mHealth interventions, to our knowledge, none of the published reviews used a theoretical framework specific to health literacy to systematically examine comprehensive aspects of health literacy within mHealth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing and evaluating health literacy in mHealth: a scoping review

Emerson¹,

Buckland²,

Lawlor³

et al. 2022

mHealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Recent surveys have revealed many adults have basic or below basic health literacy, which is linked to medical errors, increased illness, and compromised public health. Health literacy as a concept is multi-faceted extending beyond the individual to include social structures and the context in which health information is being accessed. Delivering health information via mobile devices (mHealth) expands the amount of information available while presenting challenges to ensuring these materials are suitable for a variety of literacy needs. The aims of this study are to discover how health literacy is addressed and evaluated in mHealth app development.Methods: A scoping review of 5 peer-reviewed databases was conducted. Eligible articles were written in English, addressed general literacy or mHealth/digital/eHealth literacy, and collected literacy information in order to incorporate literacy into the design and/or modification of an app or collected literacy information to describe the population being studied. The "Health Literacy Online" (HLO) United States (U.S.) government guide was used as a framework.Results: Thirty-two articles were reviewed. Articles included health literacy recommendations for all HLO categories and some recommendations not aligned with these categories. Most articles addressed health literacy using specific HLO categories though none incorporated every HLO category. The most common categories addressed engagement and testing of mHealth content. Though several studies addressed health literacy through a formal assessment tool, most did not. Evaluation of health literacy in mHealth was enduser focused and did not extensively evaluate content for fit to a variety of individuals with limited health literacy. Conclusions:The recommendations seen consistently in our results in conjunction with formal HLO categories can act as beginning steps towards development of a health literacy evaluation tool for mHealth apps themselves. It is clear efforts are being made to reduce barriers to using mHealth for those with literacy deficits, however, it was also clear that this space has room to be more pragmatic in evaluation of mHealth tools for literacy. End user engagement in design and testing is necessary in future mHealth literacy tool development.

show abstract

eHealth literacy among older adults living with cancer and their caregivers: A scoping review

Cited by 41 publications

References 64 publications

Comparing Transactional eHealth Literacy of Individuals With Cancer and Surrogate Information Seekers: Mixed Methods Study

Comparing Transactional eHealth Literacy of Individuals With Cancer and Surrogate Information Seekers: Mixed Methods Study

Informal Caregivers’ Health Literacy in Lisbon, Portugal: A Profile for Health Promotion Prioritization

Addressing and evaluating health literacy in mHealth: a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About