Cited by 34Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityInformation Architecture and UsabilityMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Information Architecture of Web-Based Interventions to Improve Health Outcomes: Systematic Review

Open access
Pugatch, Jillian, Grenen, Emily, Surla, Stacy, Schwarz, Mary, Cole-Lewis, Heather·2018·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The rise in usage of and access to new technologies in recent years has led to a growth in digital health behavior change interventions. As the shift to digital platforms continues to grow, it is increasingly important to consider how the field of information architecture (IA) can inform the development of digital health interventions. IA is the way in which digital content is organized and displayed, which strongly impacts users' ability to find and use content. While many information architecture best practices exist, there is a lack of empirical evidence on the role it plays in influencing behavior change and health outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to conduct a systematic review synthesizing the existing literature on website information architecture and its effect on health outcomes, behavioral outcomes, and website engagement. METHODS: To identify all existing information architecture and health behavior literature, we searched articles published in English in the following databases (no date restrictions imposed): ACM Digital Library, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Ebsco, and PubMed. The search terms used included information terms (eg, information architecture, interaction design, persuasive design), behavior terms (eg, health behavior, behavioral intervention, ehealth), and health terms (eg, smoking, physical activity, diabetes). The search results were reviewed to determine if they met the inclusion and exclusion criteria created to identify empirical research that studied the effect of IA on health outcomes, behavioral outcomes, or website engagement. Articles that met inclusion criteria were assessed for study quality. Then, data from the articles were extracted using a priori categories established by 3 reviewers. However, the limited health outcome data gathered from the studies precluded a meta-analysis. RESULTS: The initial literature search yielded 685 results, which was narrowed down to three publications that examined the effect of information architecture on health outcomes, behavioral outcomes, or website engagement. One publication studied the isolated impact of information architecture on outcomes of interest (ie, website use and engagement; health-related knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs; and health behaviors), while the other two publications studied the impact of information architecture, website features (eg, interactivity, email prompts, and forums), and tailored content on these outcomes. The paper that investigated IA exclusively found that a tunnel IA improved site engagement and behavior knowledge, but it decreased users' perceived efficiency. The first study that did not isolate IA found that the enhanced site condition improved site usage but not the amount of content viewed. The second study that did not isolate IA found that a tailored site condition improved site usage, behavior knowledge, and some behavior outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: No clear conclusion can be made about the relationship between IA and health outcomes, given limited evidence in the peer-reviewed literature connecting IA to behavioral outcomes and website engagement. Only one study reviewed solely manipulated IA, and we therefore recommend improving the scientific evidence base such that additional empirical studies investigate the impact of IA in isolation. Moreover, information from the gray literature and expert opinion might be identified and added to the evidence base, in order to lay the groundwork for hypothesis generation to improve empirical evidence on information architecture and health and behavior outcomes.

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.7867

Cites

17 of 17 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: 3

  1. [2]Rosenfeld L Morville P Arango J Rufino A Information Architecture for the Web and Beyond. 4th edition 2015 Sebastopol, CA O'Reilly Media, Inc 1 461
  2. [6]Garrett J Nolan MJ The Elements of User Experience: User-Centered Design for the Web and Beyond. 2nd edition 2011 Berkeley, CA New Riders 1 174
  3. [13]Adibi S Mobile Health: A technology roadmap 2015 Switzerland Springer 1 1172

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pugatch, J., Grenen, E., Surla, S., Schwarz, M., & Cole-Lewis, H.
Affiliations
  • ICF International (United States) (US)
  • Johnson & Johnson (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Pugatch, Jillian
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2018-03-21
Volume
20
Issue
3
Pages
e97
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2793451000
Cited by
34
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 6
FWCI
0.82
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)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (#HHSN261201400002B, HHSN26100007)
  • National Cancer Institute (#HHSN26100007, HHSN261201400002C, #HHSN261201400002B)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Architecture and Usability
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
information architecture, online intervention, health outcomes, website engagement, persuasive design, interaction design, e-health, smoking, physical activity, diabetes mellitus, online forums, interactivity, health websites, health beliefs and attitudes, health behavior change interventions, internet use
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Health Care, Health Behavior, Internet

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