Cited by 31Health Literacy and Information AccessibilitySocial Media in Health EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

Health Communication on the Internet: Promoting Public Health and Exploring Disparities in the Generative AI Era

Open access
Uddin, Jamal, Feng, Cheng, Xu, Junfang·2025·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Health communication and promotion on the internet have evolved over time, driven by the development of new technologies, including generative artificial intelligence (GenAI). These technological tools offer new opportunities for both the public and professionals. However, these advancements also pose risks of exacerbating health disparities. Limited research has focused on combining these health communication mediums, particularly those enabled by new technologies like GenAI, and their applications for health promotion and health disparities. Therefore, this viewpoint, adopting a conceptual approach, provides an updated overview of health communication mediums and their role in understanding health promotion and disparities in the GenAI era. Additionally, health promotion and health disparities associated with GenAI are briefly discussed through the lens of the Technology Acceptance Model 2, the uses and gratifications theory, and the knowledge gap hypothesis. This viewpoint discusses the limitations and barriers of previous internet-based communication mediums regarding real-time responses, personalized advice, and follow-up inquiries, highlighting the potential of new technology for public health promotion. It also discusses the health disparities caused by the limitations of GenAI, such as individuals’ inability to evaluate information, restricted access to services, and the lack of skill development. Overall, this study lays the groundwork for future research on how GenAI could be leveraged for public health promotion and how its challenges and barriers may exacerbate health inequities. It underscores the need for more empirical studies, as well as the importance of enhancing digital literacy and increasing access to technology for socially disadvantaged populations.

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 · 10.2196/66032

Cites

112 of 112 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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?

  • Racialized and marginalized groups bore the greatest burden of COVID-19, replicating and sometimes widening pre-pandemic health disparities.

    “Racialized and marginalized groups bore the greatest burden of COVID-19, replicating and sometimes widening the health disparities that were already evident pre-pandemic (7, 8).”

    From The Health Communications Assessment Checklist: a teaching tool for uncovering bias in the age of AI (2026) · cites this paper as [8]

    The “Potential Health Disparity Through GenAI” section says disadvantaged groups, including racial and ethnic minorities, experience worse health and greater health risks. The “Digital Divide on the Internet” section notes reduced telemedicine use among some patients during COVID-19. Neither passage establishes that these groups bore the greatest burden of COVID-19 or that the pandemic widened pre-existing health disparities. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Uddin, J., Feng, C., & Xu, J.
Affiliations
  • Cornell University (US)
  • Tsinghua University (CN)
  • Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University (CN)
Corresponding author
Xu, Junfang
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2025-03-06
Volume
27
Pages
e66032
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4408185357
Cited by
31
References
112
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 9
FWCI
39.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
health communication, health promotion, health disparities, generative AI, internet-based communication, Technology Acceptance Model 2, uses and gratifications theory, knowledge gap hypothesis, digital literacy, access to technology, personalized health advice
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Health Promotion, Humans, Public Health, Internet, Health Communication

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