How do patients with high cardiovascular risk evaluate online health information? A qualitative study
Abstract Background People are exposed to variable health information from the Internet, potentially influencing their health decision-making and behaviour. It remains a challenge for people to discern between good- and poor-quality online health information (OHI). This study explored how patients e...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2023-11-01
|
| Series: | BMC Primary Care |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-023-02182-7 |
| _version_ | 1827709268582727680 |
|---|---|
| author | Hooi Min Lim Chirk Jenn Ng Adina Abdullah Adam G. Dunn |
| author_facet | Hooi Min Lim Chirk Jenn Ng Adina Abdullah Adam G. Dunn |
| author_sort | Hooi Min Lim |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background People are exposed to variable health information from the Internet, potentially influencing their health decision-making and behaviour. It remains a challenge for people to discern between good- and poor-quality online health information (OHI). This study explored how patients evaluate and determine trust in statin-related OHI in patients with high cardiovascular risk. Methods This qualitative study used vignettes and think-aloud methods. We recruited patients from a primary care clinic who were at least 18 years old, had high cardiovascular risk and had previously sought OHI. Participants were given two statin-related vignettes: Vignette 1 (low-quality information) and Vignette 2 (high-quality information). Participants voiced their thoughts aloud when reading the vignettes and determined the trust level for each vignette using a 5-point Likert scale. This was followed by a semi-structured interview which was audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were coded and analysed using thematic analysis. Results A total of 20 participants were recruited, with age ranging from 38–74 years. Among all the high cardiovascular-risk participants, eight had pre-existing cardiovascular diseases. For Vignette 1 (low-quality information), five participants trusted it while nine participants were unsure of their trust. 17 participants (85%) trusted Vignette 2 (high-quality information). Five themes emerged from the analysis of how patients evaluated OHI: (1) logical content, (2) neutral stance and tone of OHI content, (3) credibility of the information source, (4) consistent with prior knowledge and experience, and (5) corroboration with information from other sources. Conclusion Patients with high cardiovascular risks focused on the content, source credibility and information consistency when evaluating and determining their trust in statin-related OHI. Doctors should adopt a more personalised approach when discussing statin-related online misinformation with patients by considering their prior knowledge, beliefs and experience of statin use. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T17:18:33Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b7b1b05edb9b4a479e65bebe3c47f4c6 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2731-4553 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T17:18:33Z |
| publishDate | 2023-11-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Primary Care |
| spelling | doaj.art-b7b1b05edb9b4a479e65bebe3c47f4c62023-11-20T10:25:40ZengBMCBMC Primary Care2731-45532023-11-0124111010.1186/s12875-023-02182-7How do patients with high cardiovascular risk evaluate online health information? A qualitative studyHooi Min Lim0Chirk Jenn Ng1Adina Abdullah2Adam G. Dunn3Department of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti MalayaDepartment of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti MalayaDepartment of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti MalayaBiomedical Informatics and Digital Health, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of SydneyAbstract Background People are exposed to variable health information from the Internet, potentially influencing their health decision-making and behaviour. It remains a challenge for people to discern between good- and poor-quality online health information (OHI). This study explored how patients evaluate and determine trust in statin-related OHI in patients with high cardiovascular risk. Methods This qualitative study used vignettes and think-aloud methods. We recruited patients from a primary care clinic who were at least 18 years old, had high cardiovascular risk and had previously sought OHI. Participants were given two statin-related vignettes: Vignette 1 (low-quality information) and Vignette 2 (high-quality information). Participants voiced their thoughts aloud when reading the vignettes and determined the trust level for each vignette using a 5-point Likert scale. This was followed by a semi-structured interview which was audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were coded and analysed using thematic analysis. Results A total of 20 participants were recruited, with age ranging from 38–74 years. Among all the high cardiovascular-risk participants, eight had pre-existing cardiovascular diseases. For Vignette 1 (low-quality information), five participants trusted it while nine participants were unsure of their trust. 17 participants (85%) trusted Vignette 2 (high-quality information). Five themes emerged from the analysis of how patients evaluated OHI: (1) logical content, (2) neutral stance and tone of OHI content, (3) credibility of the information source, (4) consistent with prior knowledge and experience, and (5) corroboration with information from other sources. Conclusion Patients with high cardiovascular risks focused on the content, source credibility and information consistency when evaluating and determining their trust in statin-related OHI. Doctors should adopt a more personalised approach when discussing statin-related online misinformation with patients by considering their prior knowledge, beliefs and experience of statin use.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-023-02182-7Consumer health informaticsHealth informationeHealth literacyMisinformationeHealthInternet |
| spellingShingle | Hooi Min Lim Chirk Jenn Ng Adina Abdullah Adam G. Dunn How do patients with high cardiovascular risk evaluate online health information? A qualitative study BMC Primary Care Consumer health informatics Health information eHealth literacy Misinformation eHealth Internet |
| title | How do patients with high cardiovascular risk evaluate online health information? A qualitative study |
| title_full | How do patients with high cardiovascular risk evaluate online health information? A qualitative study |
| title_fullStr | How do patients with high cardiovascular risk evaluate online health information? A qualitative study |
| title_full_unstemmed | How do patients with high cardiovascular risk evaluate online health information? A qualitative study |
| title_short | How do patients with high cardiovascular risk evaluate online health information? A qualitative study |
| title_sort | how do patients with high cardiovascular risk evaluate online health information a qualitative study |
| topic | Consumer health informatics Health information eHealth literacy Misinformation eHealth Internet |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-023-02182-7 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT hooiminlim howdopatientswithhighcardiovascularriskevaluateonlinehealthinformationaqualitativestudy AT chirkjennng howdopatientswithhighcardiovascularriskevaluateonlinehealthinformationaqualitativestudy AT adinaabdullah howdopatientswithhighcardiovascularriskevaluateonlinehealthinformationaqualitativestudy AT adamgdunn howdopatientswithhighcardiovascularriskevaluateonlinehealthinformationaqualitativestudy |