Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 674

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS): Development, Design, and Dissemination

Nelson, David, Kreps, Gary, Hesse, Bradford, Croyle, Robert, Willis, Gordon, Arora, Neeraj, Rimer, Barbara, Vish Viswanath, K., Weinstein, Neil, Alden, Sara·2004·Journal of Health Communication
DOI 10.1080/10810730490504233
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Little is known about access, sources, and trust of cancer-related information, or factors that facilitate or hinder communication on a population-wide basis. Through a careful developmental process involving extensive input from many individuals and organizations, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) developed the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) to help fill this gap. This nationally representative telephone survey of 6,369 persons aged > or = 18 years among the general population was first conducted in 2002-2003, and will be repeated biennially depending on availability of funding. The purpose of creating a population survey to be repeated on a cyclical basis is to track trends in the public's rapidly changing use of new communication technologies while charting progress in meeting health communication goals in terms of the public's knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. The HINTS survey instrument was built upon extant models of health communication and behavior change, taking into account the rapidly changing communication environment. Questions in the survey were drawn from an overall theoretical framework that juxtaposed the"push" aspects of traditional broadcast media against the"pull" aspects of new media. HINTS data will be made widely available for researchers and practitioners; it will help further research in health communication and health promotion and provide useful information for programs, policies, and practices in a variety of settings.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10810730490504233

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Nelson, D., Kreps, G., Hesse, B., Croyle, R., Willis, G., Arora, N., Rimer, B., Vish Viswanath, K., Weinstein, N., & Alden, S.
Venue
Journal of Health Communication
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2004-09
Volume
9
Issue
5
Pages
443-460
ISSN
  • 1081-0730 (ISSN-L)
  • 1087-0415
DOI
10.1080/10810730490504233
OpenAlex
W2138550232
Cited by
674
References
2
FWCI
36.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.