Cited by 224Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior

Patient Perspectives on Online Health Information and Communication With Doctors: A Qualitative Study of Patients 50 Years Old and Over

Open access
Silver, Michelle Pannor·2015·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: As health care systems around the world shift toward models that emphasize self-care management, there is increasing pressure for patients to obtain health information online. It is critical that patients are able to identify potential problems with using the Internet to diagnose and treat a health issue and that they feel comfortable communicating with their doctor about the health information they acquire from the Internet. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to examine patient-identified (1) problems with using the Internet to identify and treat a health issue, (2) barriers to communication with a doctor about online health information seeking, and (3) facilitators of communication with a doctor about patient searches for health information on the Internet. METHODS: For this qualitative exploratory study, semistructured interviews were conducted with a sample of 56 adults age 50 years old and over. General concerns regarding use of the Internet to diagnose and treat a health issue were examined separately for participants based on whether they had ever discussed health information obtained through the Internet with a doctor. Discussions about barriers to and facilitators of communication about patient searches for health information on the Internet with a doctor were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Six higher-level general concerns emerged: (1) limitations in own ability, (2) credibility/limitations of online information, (3) anxiety, (4) time consumption, (5) conflict, and (6) non-physical harm. The most prevalent concern raised by participants who communicated with a doctor about their online health information seeking related to the credibility or limitations in online information. Participants who had never communicated with a doctor about their online health information seeking most commonly reported concerns about non-physical harm. Four barriers to communication emerged: (1) concerns about embarrassment, (2) concerns that the doctor doesn't want to hear about it, (3) belief that there is no need to bring it up, and (4) forgetting to bring it up. Facilitators of communication included: (1) having a family member present at doctor visits, (2) doctor-initiated inquiries, and (3) encountering an advertisement that suggested talking with a doctor. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, participants displayed awareness of potential problems related to online health information seeking. Findings from this study point to a set of barriers as well as facilitators of communication about online health information seeking between patients and doctors. This study highlights the need for enhanced patient communication skills, eHealth literacy assessments that are accompanied by targeted resources pointing individuals to high-quality credible online health information, and the need to remind patients of the importance of consulting a medical professional when they use online health resources to diagnose and treat a health issue.

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.3588

Cites

86 of 86 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: 2

  1. [76]Lau F Price M Keshavjee K From benefits evaluation to clinical adoption: Making sense of health information system success in Canada hcq 2011 1 27 14 1 39 45 10.12927/hcq.2011.22157 21301238 · DOI
  2. [77]Lewis N Gray SW Freres DR Hornik RC Examining cross-source engagement with cancer-related information and its impact on doctor-patient relations Health Commun 2009 12 24 8 723 34 10.1080/10410230903264030 20183381 20183381 PMC2950967 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Silver, M. P.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Silver, Michelle Pannor
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2015-01-13
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
e19
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2074782377
Cited by
224
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
36.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Toronto
  • University of Toronto Scarborough
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
online health information seeking, older adults, patient-physician communication, communication barriers, digital health literacy, self-diagnosis, patient concerns, embarrassment
MeSH terms
Aged, Attitude to Computers, Attitude to Health, Communication, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Physician-Patient Relations, Physicians, Self Care, Internet, Qualitative Research, Consumer Health Information, Information Seeking Behavior

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