As the quality of online health information remains questionable, there is a pressing need to understand how consumers evaluate this information. Past reviews identified content-, source-, and ...individual-related factors that influence consumer judgment in this area. However, systematic knowledge concerning the evaluation process, that is, why and how these factors influence the evaluation behavior, is lacking.
This review aims (1) to identify criteria (rules that reflect notions of value and worth) that consumers use to evaluate the quality of online health information and the indicators (properties of information objects to which criteria are applied to form judgments) they use to support the evaluation in order to achieve a better understanding of the process of information quality evaluation and (2) to explicate the relationship between indicators and criteria to provide clear guidelines for designers of consumer health information systems.
A systematic literature search was performed in seven digital reference databases including Medicine, Psychology, Communication, and Library and Information Science to identify empirical studies that report how consumers directly and explicitly describe their evaluation of online health information quality. Thirty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria. A qualitative content analysis was performed to identify quality evaluation criteria, indicators, and their relationships.
We identified 25 criteria and 165 indicators. The most widely reported criteria used by consumers were trustworthiness, expertise, and objectivity. The indicators were related to source, content, and design. Among them, 114 were positive indicators (entailing positive quality judgments), 35 were negative indicators (entailing negative judgments), and 16 indicators had both positive and negative quality influence, depending on contextual factors (eg, source and individual differences) and criteria applied. The most widely reported indicators were site owners/sponsors; consensus among multiple sources; characteristics of writing and language; advertisements; content authorship; and interface design.
Consumer evaluation of online health information is a complex cost-benefit analysis process that involves the use of a wide range of criteria and a much wider range of quality indicators. There are commonalities in the use of criteria across user groups and source types, but the differences are hard to ignore. Evidently, consumers' health information evaluation can be characterized as highly subjective and contextualized, and sometimes, misinformed. These findings invite more research into how different user groups evaluate different types of online sources and a personalized approach to educate users about evaluating online health information quality.
Recent years have witnessed a dramatic increase in consumer online health information seeking. The quality of online health information, however, remains questionable. The issue of information ...evaluation has become a hot topic, leading to the development of guidelines and checklists to design high-quality online health information. However, little attention has been devoted to how consumers, in particular people with low health literacy, evaluate online health information.
The main aim of this study was to review existing evidence on the association between low health literacy and (1) people's ability to evaluate online health information, (2) perceived quality of online health information, (3) trust in online health information, and (4) use of evaluation criteria for online health information.
Five academic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Communication and Mass-media Complete) were systematically searched. We included peer-reviewed publications investigating differences in the evaluation of online information between people with different health literacy levels.
After abstract and full-text screening, 38 articles were included in the review. Only four studies investigated the specific role of low health literacy in the evaluation of online health information. The other studies examined the association between educational level or other skills-based proxies for health literacy, such as general literacy, and outcomes. Results indicate that low health literacy (and related skills) are negatively related to the ability to evaluate online health information and trust in online health information. Evidence on the association with perceived quality of online health information and use of evaluation criteria is inconclusive.
The findings indicate that low health literacy (and related skills) play a role in the evaluation of online health information. This topic is therefore worth more scholarly attention. Based on the results of this review, future research in this field should (1) specifically focus on health literacy, (2) devote more attention to the identification of the different criteria people use to evaluate online health information, (3) develop shared definitions and measures for the most commonly used outcomes in the field of evaluation of online health information, and (4) assess the relationship between the different evaluative dimensions and the role played by health literacy in shaping their interplay.
Background: Health information systems offer many potential benefits for healthcare, including financial benefits and for improving the quality of patient care. The purpose of District Health ...Information Systems (DHIS) is to document data that are routinely collected in all public health facilities in a country using the system.
Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the strengths and operational challenges of DHIS2, with a goal to enable decision makers in different counties to more accurately evaluate the outcomes of introducing DHIS2 into their particular country.
Method: A review of the literature combined with the method of meta-synthesis was used to source information and interpret results relating to the strengths and operational challenges of DHIS2. Databases (Embase, PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar) were searched for documents related to strengths and operational challenges of DHIS2, with no time limit up to 8 April 2017. The review and evaluation of selected studies was conducted in three stages: title, abstract and full text. Each of the selected studies was reviewed carefully and key concepts extracted. These key concepts were divided into two categories of strengths and operational challenges of DHIS2. Then, each category was grouped based on conceptual similarity to achieve the main themes and sub-themes. Content analysis was used to analyse extracted data.
Results: Of 766 identified citations, 20 studies from 11 countries were included and analysed in this study. Identified strengths in the DHIS were represented in seven themes (with 21 categories): technical features of software, proper management of data, application flexibility, networking and increasing the satisfaction of stakeholders, development of data management, increasing access to information and economic benefits. Operational challenges were identified and captured in 11 themes (with 18 categories): funds; appropriate communication infrastructure; the need for the existence of appropriate data; political, cultural, social and structural infrastructure; manpower; senior managers; training; using academic potentials; definition and standardising the deployment processes; neglect to application of criteria and clinical guidelines in the use of system; data security; stakeholder communications challenges and the necessity to establish a pilot system.
Conclusion: This study highlighted specific strengths in the technical and functional aspects of DHIS2 and also drew attention to particular challenges and concerns. These results provide a sound evidence base for decision makers and policymakers to enable them to make more accurate decisions about whether or not to use the DHIS2 in the health system of their country.
The abundance of health information available online provides consumers with greater access to information pertinent to the management of health conditions. This is particularly important given an ...increasing drive for consumer-focused health care models globally, especially in the management of chronic health conditions, and in recognition of challenges faced by lay consumers with finding, understanding, and acting on health information sourced online. There is a paucity of literature exploring the navigational needs of consumers with regards to accessing online health information. Further, existing interventions appear to be didactic in nature, and it is unclear whether such interventions appeal to consumers' needs.
Our goal was to explore the navigational needs of consumers with chronic health conditions in finding online health information within the broader context of consumers' online health information-seeking behaviors. Potential barriers to online navigation were also identified.
Semistructured interviews were conducted with adult consumers who reported using the Internet for health information and had at least one chronic health condition. Participants were recruited from nine metropolitan community pharmacies within Western Australia, as well as through various media channels. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and then imported into QSR NVivo 10. Two established approaches to thematic analysis were adopted. First, a data-driven approach was used to minimize potential bias in analysis and improve construct and criterion validity. A theory-driven approach was subsequently used to confirm themes identified by the former approach and to ensure identified themes were relevant to the objectives. Two levels of analysis were conducted for both data-driven and theory-driven approaches: manifest-level analysis, whereby face-value themes were identified, and latent-level analysis, whereby underlying concepts were identified.
We conducted 17 interviews, with data saturation achieved by the 14th interview. While we identified a broad range of online health information-seeking behaviors, most related to information discussed during consumer-health professional consultations such as looking for information about medication side effects. The barriers we identified included intrinsic barriers, such as limited eHealth literacy, and extrinsic barriers, such as the inconsistency of information between different online sources. The navigational needs of our participants were extrinsic in nature and included health professionals directing consumers to appropriate online resources and better filtering of online health information. Our participants' online health information-seeking behaviors, reported barriers, and navigational needs were underpinned by the themes of trust, patient activation, and relevance.
This study suggests that existing interventions aimed to assist consumers with navigating online health information may not be what consumers want or perceive they need. eHealth literacy and patient activation appear to be prevalent concepts in the context of consumers' online health information-seeking behaviors. Furthermore, the role for health professionals in guiding consumers to quality online health information is highlighted.
Objective
The objective of this literature review was to summarise current research regarding how consumers seek health‐related information from social media. Primarily, we hope to reveal ...characteristics of existing studies investigating the health topics that consumers have discussed in social media, ascertaining the roles social media have played in consumers’ information‐seeking processes and discussing the potential benefits and concerns of accessing consumer health information in social media.
Methods
The Web of Science Core Collection database was searched for existing literature on consumer health information seeking in social media. The search returned 214 articles, of which 21 met the eligibility criteria following review of full‐text documents.
Conclusion
Between 2011 and 2016, twenty‐one studies published explored various topics related to consumer information seeking in social media. These ranged from online discussions on specific diseases (e.g. diabetes) to public health concerns (e.g. pesticide residues). Consumers’ information needs vary depending on the health issues of interest. Benefits of health seeking on social media, in addition to filling a need for health information, include the social and emotional support health consumers gain from peer‐to‐peer interactions. These benefits, however, are tempered by concerns of information quality and authority and lead to decreased consumer engagement.
Recent policy making aims to prevent health systems, lectronic health record (EHR) vendors, and others from blocking the electronic sharing of patient data necessary for clinical care. We sought to ...assess the prevalence of information blocking prior to enforcement of these rules.
We conducted a national survey of health information exchange organizations (HIEs) to measure the prevalence of information blocking behaviors observed by these third-party entities. Eighty-nine of 106 HIEs (84%) meeting the inclusion criteria responded.
The majority (55%) of HIEs reported that EHR vendors at least sometimes engage in information blocking, while 30% of HIEs reported the same for health systems. The most common type of information blocking behavior EHR vendors engaged in was setting unreasonably high prices, which 42% of HIEs reported routinely observing. The most common type of information blocking behavior health systems engaged in was refusing to share information, which 14% of HIEs reported routinely observing. Reported levels of vendor information blocking was correlated with regional competition among vendors and information blocking was concentrated in some geographic regions.
Our findings are consistent with early reports, revealing persistently high levels of information blocking and important variation by actor, type of behavior, and geography. These trends reflect the observations and experiences of HIEs and their potential biases. Nevertheless, these data serve as a baseline against which to measure the impact of new regulations and to inform policy makers about the most common types of information blocking behaviors.
Enforcement aimed at reducing information blocking should consider variation in prevalence and how to most effectively target efforts.
Health Information Exchange (HIE) exhibits remarkable benefits for patient care such as improving healthcare quality and expediting coordinated care. The Office of the National Coordinator (ONC) for ...Health Information Technology is seeking patient-centric HIE designs that shift data ownership from providers to patients. There are multiple barriers to patient-centric HIE in the current system, such as security and privacy concerns, data inconsistency, timely access to the right records across multiple healthcare facilities. After investigating the current workflow of HIE, this paper provides a feasible solution to these challenges by utilizing the unique features of blockchain, a distributed ledger technology which is considered "unhackable". Utilizing the smart contract feature, which is a programmable self-executing protocol running on a blockchain, we developed a blockchain model to protect data security and patients' privacy, ensure data provenance, and provide patients full control of their health records. By personalizing data segmentation and an "allowed list" for clinicians to access their data, this design achieves patient-centric HIE. We conducted a large-scale simulation of this patient-centric HIE process and quantitatively evaluated the model's feasibility, stability, security, and robustness.
A critical problem for patients with chronic conditions who see multiple health care providers is incomplete or inaccurate information, which can contribute to lack of care coordination, low quality ...of care, and medical errors.
As part of a larger project on applications of consumer health information technology (HIT) and barriers to its use, we conducted a semistructured interview study with patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCC) with the objective of exploring their role in managing their personal health information.
Semistructured interviews were conducted with patients and providers. Patients were eligible if they had multiple chronic conditions and were in regular care with one of two medical organizations in New York City; health care providers were eligible if they had experience caring for patients with multiple chronic conditions. Analysis was conducted from a grounded theory perspective, and recruitment was concluded when saturation was achieved.
A total of 22 patients and 7 providers were interviewed; patients had an average of 3.5 (SD 1.5) chronic conditions and reported having regular relationships with an average of 5 providers. Four major themes arose: (1) Responsibility for managing medical information: some patients perceived information management and sharing as the responsibility of health care providers; others—particularly those who had had bad experiences in the past—took primary responsibility for information sharing; (2) What information should be shared: although privacy concerns did influence some patients' perceptions of sharing of medical data, decisions about what to share were also heavily influenced by their understanding of health and disease and by the degree to which they understood the health care system; (3) Methods and tools varied: those patients who did take an active role in managing their records used a variety of electronic tools, paper tools, and memory; and (4) Information management as invisible work: managing transfers of medical information to solve problems was a tremendous amount of work that was largely unrecognized by the medical establishment.
We conclude that personal health information management should be recognized as an additional burden that MCC places upon patients. Effective structural solutions for information sharing, whether institutional ones such as care management or technological ones such as electronic health information exchange, are likely not only to improve the quality of information shared but reduce the burden on patients already weighed down by MCC.
Context: Although the clinical benefits of exchanging patients' health information electronically across providers have long been recognized, participation in health information exchange (HIE) has ...lagged behind adoption of electronic health records. Barriers erected by federal and state health information privacy law have been cited as a leading reason for the slow progress. A comprehensive assessment of these issues has not been undertaken for nearly a decade, despite a number of salient legal developments. Methods: Analysis of federal and state health information privacy statutes and regulations and secondary materials. Findings: Although some legal barriers to HIE persist, many have been ameliorated—in some cases, simply through improved understanding of what the law actually requires. It is now clear that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act presents no obstacles to electronically sharing protected health information for treatment purposes and does not hold providers who properly disclose information liable for privacy breaches by recipients. The failure of federal efforts to establish a unique patient identifier number does slow HIE by inhibiting optimal matching of patient records, but other action to facilitate matching will be taken under the 21st Century Cures Act. The Cures Act also creates the legal architecture to begin to combat "information blocking." Varying patient consent requirements under federal and state law are the most important remaining legal barrier to HIE progress. However, federal rules relating to disclosure of substance-abuse treatment information were recently liberalized, and development of a technical standard, Data Segmentation for Privacy, or DS4P, now permits sensitive data requiring special handling to be segmented within a patient's record. Even with these developments, state-law requirements for patient consent remain daunting to navigate. Conclusions: Although patient consent requirements make HIE challenging, providers' expressed worries about legal barriers to participating in HIE likely primarily reflect concerns that are economically motivated. Lowering the cost of HIE or increasing financial incentives may boost provider participation more than further reducing legal barriers.
PDF
