Factors influencing eHealth literacy among Korean nursing students: A cross‐sectional study

Abstract

Successful online learning depends on the supported learner's attitude, motivation, and self‐efficacy, along with their ability to use the flexibility and convenience of digital technology. As information and communications technology is introduced in healthcare, eHealth literacy (eHL) is becoming increasingly essential in nursing education. This study aimed to identify the eHL levels and the factors affecting eHL among nursing students. A survey was conducted among 205 nursing students from two colleges in Korea. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and the factors associated with the eHL of nursing students were examined using multiple regression analysis. The eHL of nursing students, measured using the eHealth literacy scale, was found to be higher than in previous studies. Factors affecting eHL of nursing students were academic level, digital literacy toward information and communications technology for learning, and self‐efficacy for online education. These factors accounted for 38.8% of the variability in eHL among nursing students. In order to improve the eHL of nursing students, nursing education should consider a multidimensional approach toward developing digital literacy and self‐efficacy among them.

Filipino Nursing Students' eHealth Literacy and Criteria Used for Selection of Health Websites

“…Contrary to the result of prior studies [2,10,14], this study found no difference in the eHealth literacy of nursing students according to academic year level. Perhaps, in this current study, only two academic year levels were compared.…”

“…Among nursing student samples, a low or inadequate self-perceived level of eHealth literacy was reported in Ethiopia [14] and Sri Lanka [15] while moderate eHealth literacy was disclosed with nursing students in Jordan [2], Nepal [3], and Japan [16]. On the other hand, nursing students in Korea [10] and Denmark [17] reported satisfactory eHealth literacy. A comparison of American and Korean nursing students' eHealth literacy found that nursing students in the US posted higher mean scores of eHealth literacy [1].…”

Evaluation of e-health literacy with the DMVEC.it website in undergraduate student: a pre-test and post-test study

“…At baseline this study revealed an overall mean score of eHEALS of 3.6 (SD 0.7) for medical students and of 3.2 (SD 0.8) for communication students. These scores are consistent with results obtained by similar studies that analyzed e-HL among college students 18,19,20,21 and pointed out a moderate con dence in the use electronic devices for medical purposes. Medical students at the beginning felt more con dent in how to nd and use helpful health resources and how to discern low quality from high quality sources (items scores higher than the overall mean score of eHEALS).…”

“…Communication students' perceived abilities with higher scores concerned how to nd and use medical information, what resources are available on the Internet and how to discriminate sources' quality too. These initial ndings partially agreed with other similar studies conducted on college students who seemed aware of available resources and how to reach them, but their abilities in nding good quality health resources were generally poor 18,19,20,21,22 . Our ndings could re ect the high level of students' connection and interaction with technology in their everyday life and their attitude towards web sur ng to investigate general topics.…”

“…Instead, in the current study, the items with the lowest scores for all participants were the ones concerning the abilities in evaluating health information and the self-con dence in its use. Many authors 21,18,19 found the same results in their studies, but they correlated the lack of con dence in using the Internet in health-related decisions to the inability in judging the sources' quality. In the study population, these contradictory results in the evaluation process could be linked to the lack of proper medical terminology for communication students and to the inexperience for medical students attending only their rst year.…”