CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 147Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior

Patients’ use of the internet for pain-related medical information

de Boer, Maaike J., Versteegen, Gerbrig J., van Wijhe, Marten·2007·Patient Education and Counseling
DOI 10.1016/j.pec.2007.05.012
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective Patients increasingly use the Internet for medical information. For doctor-patient communication it is important to gain insight into the use and impact of medical Internet searches of patients. This study aims to evaluate patients' use of the Internet for information about their pain problem.Methods A self-administered survey on pain-related Internet use was sent to 200 new patients attending a university pain center. The response rate was 61%.Results Half of all respondents used the Internet for medical information and a smaller percentage (39%) searched for specific information about pain. Patients found information on the Internet to be of good quality and quite easy to find and understand. In general, Respondents did not learn anything new. The on-line medical information confirmed what they already knew. Less than half of the respondents discussed information from the Internet with their physician.Conclusion Half of all patients used the Internet for medical information. Patients are reasonably certain that the information is accurate and reliable, while this may not always be the case.Practice implications Physicians should inquire about patients' use of various sources of information (such as the Internet) and offer to clarify any questions or concerns that arise from that use.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pec.2007.05.012

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
de Boer, M. J., Versteegen, G. J., & van Wijhe, M.
Affiliations
University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
Venue
Patient Education and Counseling
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-09
Volume
68
Issue
1
Pages
86-97
ISSN
0738-3991 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.pec.2007.05.012
OpenAlex
W2165229085
Cited by
147
References
29
Citations by year
2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 8
FWCI
10.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Patient Education and Counseling (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
Keywords
internet use, online health information, pain, patient information seeking, physician-patient communication, information quality
MeSH terms
Academic Medical Centers, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Attitude to Computers, Attitude to Health, Communication, Computer Literacy, Female, Humans, Information Services, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Motivation, Netherlands, Pain, Patient Education as Topic, Physician-Patient Relations, Surveys and Questionnaires, Information Storage and Retrieval, Pain Clinics, Internet

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review