Cited by 190Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorHealth, Technology, Consumer Behavior

Evaluating the Process of Online Health Information Searching: A Qualitative Approach to Exploring Consumer Perspectives

Open access
Fiksdal, Alexander S, Kumbamu, Ashok, Jadhav, Ashutosh S, Cocos, Cristian, Nelsen, Laurie A, Pathak, Jyotishman, McCormick, Jennifer B·2014·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Internet is a common resource that patients and consumers use to access health-related information. Multiple practical, cultural, and socioeconomic factors influence why, when, and how people utilize this tool. Improving the delivery of health-related information necessitates a thorough understanding of users' searching-related needs, preferences, and experiences. Although a wide body of quantitative research examining search behavior exists, qualitative approaches have been under-utilized and provide unique perspectives that may prove useful in improving the delivery of health information over the Internet. OBJECTIVE: We conducted this study to gain a deeper understanding of online health-searching behavior in order to inform future developments of personalizing information searching and content delivery. METHODS: We completed three focus groups with adult residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota, which explored perceptions of online health information searching. Participants were recruited through flyers and classifieds advertisements posted throughout the community. We audio-recorded and transcribed all focus groups, and analyzed data using standard qualitative methods. RESULTS: Almost all participants reported using the Internet to gather health information. They described a common experience of searching, filtering, and comparing results in order to obtain information relevant to their intended search target. Information saturation and fatigue were cited as main reasons for terminating searching. This information was often used as a resource to enhance their interactions with health care providers. CONCLUSIONS: Many participants viewed the Internet as a valuable tool for finding health information in order to support their existing health care resources. Although the Internet is a preferred source of health information, challenges persist in streamlining the search process. Content providers should continue to develop new strategies and technologies aimed at accommodating diverse populations, vocabularies, and health information needs.

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/jmir.3341

Cites

29 of 29 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [5]Higgins OSJ Barry MM Dmegan C A literature review on health information seeking behaviour on the web: a health consumer and health professional perspective European Centre for Disease Control 2011 10 1 16

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fiksdal, A. S., Kumbamu, A., Jadhav, A. S., Cocos, C., Nelsen, L. A., Pathak, J., & McCormick, J. B.
Affiliations
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
Corresponding author
McCormick, Jennifer B
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2014-10-07
Volume
16
Issue
9
Pages
e224
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2060711405
Cited by
189
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 7
FWCI
22.93
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)
  • CORE Scholar (Wright State University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Journal of Bioresource Management (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000135)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Health, Technology, Consumer Behavior
Keywords
health information seeking, customer perspective, search behavior, information saturation, health information needs, patient-provider communication, online health information seeking
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Female, Health Resources, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Focus Groups, Internet, Consumer Health Information, Young Adult, Information Seeking Behavior, Health Information Exchange

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