Cited by 651Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorSocial Media in Health Education

Low Health Literacy and Evaluation of Online Health Information: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Open access
Diviani, Nicola, van den Putte, Bas, Giani, Stefano, van Weert, Julia CM·2015·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent years have witnessed a dramatic increase in consumer online health information seeking. The quality of online health information, however, remains questionable. The issue of information evaluation has become a hot topic, leading to the development of guidelines and checklists to design high-quality online health information. However, little attention has been devoted to how consumers, in particular people with low health literacy, evaluate online health information. OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to review existing evidence on the association between low health literacy and (1) people's ability to evaluate online health information, (2) perceived quality of online health information, (3) trust in online health information, and (4) use of evaluation criteria for online health information. METHODS: Five academic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Communication and Mass-media Complete) were systematically searched. We included peer-reviewed publications investigating differences in the evaluation of online information between people with different health literacy levels. RESULTS: After abstract and full-text screening, 38 articles were included in the review. Only four studies investigated the specific role of low health literacy in the evaluation of online health information. The other studies examined the association between educational level or other skills-based proxies for health literacy, such as general literacy, and outcomes. Results indicate that low health literacy (and related skills) are negatively related to the ability to evaluate online health information and trust in online health information. Evidence on the association with perceived quality of online health information and use of evaluation criteria is inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that low health literacy (and related skills) play a role in the evaluation of online health information. This topic is therefore worth more scholarly attention. Based on the results of this review, future research in this field should (1) specifically focus on health literacy, (2) devote more attention to the identification of the different criteria people use to evaluate online health information, (3) develop shared definitions and measures for the most commonly used outcomes in the field of evaluation of online health information, and (4) assess the relationship between the different evaluative dimensions and the role played by health literacy in shaping their interplay.

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.4018

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?

  • Low health literacy impedes the ability to critically evaluate online health information.

    “Our findings echoes Diviani et al., who highlighted that low health literacy impedes the ability to critically evaluate online health information [40].”

    From Acceptance and perceived usefulness of digital health services in the management of chronic urticaria: a survey of patients and physicians (2025) · cites this paper as [40]

    The Abstract (Results) reports that low health literacy is negatively related to the ability to evaluate online health information. The Discussion (Principal Findings) says it may have a negative impact but cautions that the small, heterogeneous evidence base makes its effect hard to establish. “Impedes” states that effect more definitively than the review does. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

1 of the 87 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Diviani, N., van den Putte, B., Giani, S., & van Weert, J. C.
Affiliations
University of Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Diviani, Nicola
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2015-05-07
Volume
17
Issue
5
Pages
e112
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1923752250
Cited by
638
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 90 · 2025: 76 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 74 · 2021: 71 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 4
FWCI
5.87
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)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (148345)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
Keywords
low health literacy, online health information, information evaluation, trust in health information, evaluation criteria, health information seeking, consumer health information
MeSH terms
Humans, Internet, Trust, Consumer Health Information, Health Literacy, 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