Cited by 42Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ResearchPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

Information needs and information-seeking preferences of ALS patients and their carers

Abdulla, Susanne, Vielhaber, Stefan, Machts, Judith, Heinze, Hans-Jochen, Dengler, Reinhard, Petri, Susanne·2014·Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration

Abstract

Our objective was to investigate information-seeking behaviour in patients with ALS and their caregivers and their rating of the usefulness of different information sources in Germany. Surveys were made on 106 patients and 100 caregivers in two university ALS outpatient clinics. Before seeing a doctor, 28% of patients and 23% of caregivers had used other sources to find symptom related information, mostly the internet. Although two-thirds were satisfied with the means of diagnosis disclosure, 88% of patients and 85% of caregivers searched for additional information, most often the internet (patients 72%, caregivers 85%), followed by patient brochures (patients 58%, caregivers 66%). Internet, patient brochures and the 'German Neuromuscular Disease Society' were rated most frequently as useful/very useful. Traditional print media and interpersonal contacts were also frequently used and most respondents relied on more than one source for information. Only few respondents used the internet for exchange with other patients. Two-thirds wanted to discuss web contents with their physician. In conclusion, patients with ALS and their caregivers clearly have additional information needs. Besides traditional information sources, the internet is frequently used. Therefore, reliable and useful websites should be provided. Patients' and caregivers' need to discuss their findings with the physician should be acknowledged.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/21678421.2014.932385

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abdulla, S., Vielhaber, S., Machts, J., Heinze, H.-J., Dengler, R., & Petri, S.
Affiliations
  • German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DE)
  • Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE)
Corresponding author
Abdulla, Susanne
Venue
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration
Published
2014-07-10
Volume
15
Issue
7-8
Pages
505-512
ISSN
  • 2167-8421 (ISSN-L)
  • 2167-9223
OpenAlex
W2328055608
Cited by
42
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4
FWCI
4.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DZNE Pub (submittedVersion)
Funders
Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Keywords
amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, information needs, information seeking, caregivers, patient information sources, internet use, patient information brochure, diagnosis disclosure, patient-physician communication, online patient communities
MeSH terms
Aged, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Caregivers, Internet, 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