Understanding eHealth Literacy From a Privacy Perspective: eHealth Literacy and Digital Privacy Skills in American Disadvantaged Communities
Open accessAbstract
Despite the importance of eHealth literacy in the eHealth domain, studies on the antecedents of eHealth literacy, especially through a privacy lens, are still limited. Using a door-to-door paper-and-pencil household census of public housing communities in a major American city, this study examines how eHealth literacy varies by digital privacy skills that go beyond frequency of Internet activities among members of such disadvantaged communities. Results show that proficiency in digital privacy skills plays a positive and direct role in influencing levels of eHealth literacy. In addition, proficiency in digital privacy skills mediates the positive relationship between frequency of Internet activities and levels of eHealth literacy. This study offers a refined understanding of eHealth literacy from a privacy perspective.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Protecting personal identity and privacy is essential in electronic health records and in joining online health-related groups, searching online information, and using health-related applications.
“Protecting personal identity and privacy is essential in the electronic health record and in joining online health-related groups, searching online information, and health-related applications [58].”
Individuals with sufficient skills in protecting privacy could reduce concern about sharing personal and health-related information, increase participation in online health activities, and better evaluate online resources' quality, credibility, and reliability.
“Individuals with sufficient skills in protecting privacy could reduce the concern to share their personal information, health-related information, and increase participation in online health activities, and better evaluate the online resources’ quality, credibility, and reliability [4, 58].”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
eHEALS: The eHealth Literacy Scale
Norman, C. D., & Skinner, H. A. (2006) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.8.4.e27 · Cited by 2,680 · see citing works
Digital inequalities and why they matter
Robinson, L., Cotten, S. R., Ono, H., Quan-Haase, A., Mesch, G., Chen, W., Schulz, J., Hale, T. M., & Stern, M. J. (2015) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2015.1012532 · Cited by 1,216 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In the literature regarding multilayered digital inequalities, Internet use in general has been well documented as having a positive influence on digital skills, especially Internet skills (Robinson et al., 2015).”
BackgroundKontos, E., Blake, K. D., Chou, W.-Y. S., & Prestin, A. (2014) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.3117 · Cited by 917 · see citing works
Choi, N. G., & DiNitto, D. M. (2013) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.2645 · Cited by 871 · see citing works
Security and privacy in electronic health records: a systematic literature review.
Fernández-Alemán, J. L., Señor, I. C., Lozoya, P. Á. O., & Toval, A. (2013) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2012.12.003 · Cited by 675 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Developing a secure eHealth system requires technological solutions, such as access control and data encryption, policy regulations related to information control, and education and training of all stakeholders accessing eHealth systems (Fernández-Alemán et al., 2013; Sahama et al., 2013).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 39
- Angst, C. M., & Agarwal, R. (2009). Adoption of electronic health records in the presence of privacy concerns: The elaboration likelihood model and individual persuasion. MIS Quarterly, 33, 339-370.
- Bartsch, M., & Dienlin, T. (2016). Control your Facebook: An analysis of online privacy lit- eracy. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 147-154. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.022 · DOI
- Benotsch, E. G., Kalichman, S., & Weinhardt, L. S. (2004). HIV-AIDS patients' evaluation of health information on the internet: The digital divide and vulnerability to fraudulent claims. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 1004-1011. doi:10.1037/0022- 006X.72.6.1004 · DOI
- Bodie, G. D., & Dutta, M. J. (2008). Understanding health literacy for strategic health market- ing: eHealth literacy, health disparities, and the digital divide. Health Marketing Quarterly, 25, 175-203. doi:10.1080/07359680802126301 · DOI
- Chang, B. L., Bakken, S., Brown, S. S., Houston, T. K., Kreps, G. L., Kukafka, R., . . . Stavri, P. Z. (2004). Bridging the digital divide: reaching vulnerable populations. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 11, 448-457. doi:10.1197/jamia.M1535 · DOI
- Chen, H. T., & Chen, W. (2015). Couldn't or wouldn't? The influence of privacy concerns and self-efficacy in privacy management on privacy protection. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18, 13-19. doi:10.1089/cyber.2014.0456 · DOI · Paper page
- Chen, W., & Lee, K. H. (2014). More than search? Informational and participatory eHealth behaviors. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 103-109. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.028 · DOI
- Chinn, D., & McCarthy, C. (2013). All Aspects of Health Literacy Scale (AAHLS): Developing a tool to measure functional, communicative and critical health literacy in primary healthcare settings. Patient Education and Counseling, 90, 247-253. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2012.10.019 · DOI
- Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2005). Internet privacy concerns and social awareness as determinants of intention to transact. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 10(2), 7-29. doi:10.2753/JEC1086-4415100201 · DOI
- Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006). An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions. Information Systems Research, 17, 61-80. doi:10.1287/isre.1060.0080 · DOI · Paper page
- Eng, T. R. (2002). eHealth research and evaluation: challenges and opportunities. Journal of Health Communication, 7, 267-272. doi:10.1080/10810730290001747 · DOI
- Eysenbach, G. (2001). What is e-health? Journal of Medical Internet Research, 3, e20. doi:10.2196/jmir.3.2.e20 · DOI · Paper page
- Gangadharan, S. P. (2017). The downside of digital inclusion: Expectations and experiences of privacy and surveillance among marginal Internet users. New Media & Society, 19, 597- 615. doi:10.1177/1461444815614053 · DOI
- Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na (t) ives? Variation in Internet skills and uses among mem- bers of the "Net Generation." Sociological Inquiry, 80, 92-113. doi:10.1111/j.1475- 682X.2009.00317.x · DOI · Paper page
- Hsu, W., Chiang, C., & Yang, S. (2014). The effect of individual factors on health behav- iors among college students: The mediating effects of eHealth literacy. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 16, e287. doi:10.2196/jmir.3542 · DOI · Paper page
- Katawetawaraks, C., & Cheng, L. W. (2013). Online shopper behavior: Influences of online shopping decision. Asian Journal of Business, 1, 66-74. doi:10.14707/ajbr.110012 · DOI · Paper page
- Kempf, A. M., & Remington, P. L. (2007). New challenges for telephone survey research in the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Public Health, 28, 113-126. doi:10.1146/annurev. publhealth.28.021406.144059 · DOI
- Kreps, G. L., & Neuhauser, L. (2010). New directions in eHealth communication: Opportunities and challenges. Patient Education and Counseling, 78, 329-336. doi:10.1016/j. pec.2010.01.013 · DOI · Paper page
- Laufer, R. S., & Wolfe, M. (1977). Privacy as a concept and a social issue: A multidimensional developmental theory. Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 22-42. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1977. tb01880.x · DOI · Paper page
- Mackert, M., Kahlor, L., Tyler, D., & Gustafson, J. (2009). Designing e-health interven- tions for low-health-literate culturally diverse parents: Addressing the obesity epidemic. Telemedicine and e-Health, 15, 672-677. doi:10.1089/tmj.2009.0012 · DOI
- Mangione, T. W., & Van Ness, J. H. (2009). Mail surveys. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (Eds.), The Sage handbook of applied social research methods (pp. 475-497). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Mitsutake, S., Shibata, A., Ishii, K., & Oka, K. (2016). Associations of eHealth literacy with health behavior among adult internet users. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18, e192. doi:10.2196/jmir.5413 · DOI
- Neter, E., & Brainin, E. (2012). eHealth literacy: Extending the digital divide to the realm of health information. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 14, e19. doi:10.2196/jmir.1619 · DOI
- Norman, C. D. (2011). eHealth literacy 2.0: Problems and opportunities with an evolving con- cept. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 13, e125. doi:10.2196/jmir.8.2.e9 · DOI · Paper page
- Norman, C. D., & Skinner, H. A. (2006a). eHealth literacy: Essential skills for consumer health in a networked world. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 8, e9. doi:10.2196/jmir.8.2.e9 · DOI · Paper page
- Nutbeam, D. (1998). Health promotion glossary. Health Promotion International, 13, 349-364. doi:10.1093/heapro/13.4.349 · DOI
- Nutbeam, D. (2000). Health literacy as a public health goal: A challenge for contemporary health education and communication strategies into the 21st century. Health Promotion International, 15, 259-267. doi:10.1093/heapro/15.3.259 · DOI
- Paige, S. R., Krieger, J. L., Stellefson, M., & Alber, J. M. (2017). eHealth literacy in chronic disease patients: An item response theory analysis of the eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS). Patient Education and Counseling, 100, 320-326. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2016.09.008 · DOI
- Park, Y. J. (2011). Digital literacy and privacy behavior online. Communication Research, 40, 215-236. doi:10.1177/0093650211418338 · DOI
- Reisig, M. D., Pratt, T. C., & Holtfreter, K. (2009). Perceived risk of internet theft victimization examining the effects of social vulnerability and financial impulsivity. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 369-384. doi:10.1177/0093854808329405 · DOI
- Richtering, S. S., Hyun, K., Neubeck, L., Coorey, G., Chalmers, J., Usherwood, T., . . . Redfern, J. (2017). eHealth Literacy: Predictors in a population with moderate-to-high cardiovascu- lar risk. JMIR Human Factors, 4, e4. doi:10.2196/humanfactors.6217 · DOI
- Sahama, T., Simpson, L., & Lane, B. (2013). Security and privacy in eHealth: Is it possible? In e-Health Networking, Applications & Services (Healthcom), 2013 IEEE 15th International Conference (pp. 249-253). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
- Shaw, B., Gustafson, D. H., Hawkins, R., McTavish, F., McDowell, H., Pingree, S., & Ballard, D. (2006). How underserved breast cancer patients use and benefit from eHealth programs: Implications for closing the digital divide. American Behavioral Scientist, 49, 823-834. doi:10.1177/0002764205283803 · DOI
- Stellefson, M., Hanik, B., Chaney, J. D., & Tennant, B. (2012). Analysis of ehealth search per- spectives among female college students in the health professions using Q methodology. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 14, e60. doi:10.2196/jmir.1969 · DOI
- Trepte, S., Teutsch, D., Masur, P. K., Eicher, C., Fischer, M., Hennhöfer, A., & Lind, F. (2015). Do people know about privacy and data protection strategies? Towards the "Online Privacy Literacy Scale" (OPLIS). In S. Gutwirth, R. Leenes, & P. de Hert (Eds.), Reforming European data protection law (pp. 333-365). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
- van der Vaart, R., & Drossaert, C. (2017). Development of the digital health literacy instrument: Measuring a broad spectrum of health 1.0 and health 2.0 skills. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19(1), e27. doi:10.2196/jmir.6709 · DOI · Paper page
- van Deursen, A., & van Dijk, J. (2011). Internet skills and the digital divide. New Media & Society, 13, 893-911. doi:10.1177/1461444810386774 · DOI
- van Deursen, A. J., van Dijk, J. A., & Peters, O. (2011). Rethinking Internet skills: The con- tribution of gender, age, education, Internet experience, and hours online to medium-and content-related Internet skills. Poetics, 39(2), 125-144. doi:10.1016/j.poetic.2011.02.001 · DOI
- Young, A. L., & Quan-Haase, A. (2013). Privacy protection strategies on Facebook: The Internet privacy paradox revisited. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 479-500. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.777757 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Htay, M. N. N., Parial, L. L., Tolabing, M. C., Dadaczynski, K., Okan, O., Leung, A. Y. M., & Su, T. T. (2022) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0266276 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
- Authors
- Li, X.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas at Austin (US)
- Corresponding author
- Li, Xiaoqian
- ORCID
- Li, Xiaoqian
- Venue
- American Behavioral Scientist
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2018-07-09
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1431-1449
- ISSN
- 0002-7642 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3381
- OpenAlex
- W2833729492
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 4.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- American Behavioral Scientist (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Ford Foundation
- Austin Pathway Foundation
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
- Keywords
- digital health literacy, digital privacy, public housing, disadvantaged communities, internet use frequency, mediation, low-income households
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
