Daniel Lorence1, Heeyoung Park. 1. Department of Health Policy and Administration and School of Information Science and Technology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA. Danlor467@yahoo.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which health information seeking behaviors vary across genders or are differentially associated with access to computers, the Internet, and online health information. RESEARCH DESIGN: Stratified survey, data analysis. METHODS: Using binary logistic regression we examine information seeking differences between demographic groups. Questions addressed include: 1) Are any identified groups significantly underserved regarding access to computers, access to the Internet, and preferences for seeking online health information, and 2) have differences between gender groups in access to computers, Internet services and online health information narrowed, remained constant, or widened over recent years, following recent national initiatives to narrow the technology gap for underserved populations? OUTCOMES: Information seeking variation across gender groups and between technologies was at times significant. There was little difference in the access to computer between females and males. In 2002, 75.4% and 73.1% of female and male participants reported that they occasionally use computers, respectively. In 2000, the respective figures were 72.4% and 72.7%. The rates of use of Internet services among computer users, however, were quite different between female and male (P(at 2002)= 0.0002 and P(at 2000)= 0.0082) and the disparity in 2000 (OR = 0.7366 [0.5870, 0.9243]) increased in 2002 (OR = 0.5675 [0.4222, 0.7627]). The odds ratios (OR) indicate that females were 0.7366 and 0.5675 times less likely to use computers than male counterparts in 2000 and 2002, respectively. CONCLUSION: Recent technology initiatives in the US aimed at reducing disparities in access to online resources appear to have had little effect in facilitating equal access to web-based health information.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which health information seeking behaviors vary across genders or are differentially associated with access to computers, the Internet, and online health information. RESEARCH DESIGN: Stratified survey, data analysis. METHODS: Using binary logistic regression we examine information seeking differences between demographic groups. Questions addressed include: 1) Are any identified groups significantly underserved regarding access to computers, access to the Internet, and preferences for seeking online health information, and 2) have differences between gender groups in access to computers, Internet services and online health information narrowed, remained constant, or widened over recent years, following recent national initiatives to narrow the technology gap for underserved populations? OUTCOMES: Information seeking variation across gender groups and between technologies was at times significant. There was little difference in the access to computer between females and males. In 2002, 75.4% and 73.1% of female and male participants reported that they occasionally use computers, respectively. In 2000, the respective figures were 72.4% and 72.7%. The rates of use of Internet services among computer users, however, were quite different between female and male (P(at 2002)= 0.0002 and P(at 2000)= 0.0082) and the disparity in 2000 (OR = 0.7366 [0.5870, 0.9243]) increased in 2002 (OR = 0.5675 [0.4222, 0.7627]). The odds ratios (OR) indicate that females were 0.7366 and 0.5675 times less likely to use computers than male counterparts in 2000 and 2002, respectively. CONCLUSION: Recent technology initiatives in the US aimed at reducing disparities in access to online resources appear to have had little effect in facilitating equal access to web-based health information.
Authors: Kimberly A Miller; Cynthia N Ramirez; Katherine Y Wojcik; Anamara Ritt-Olson; Lourdes Baezconde-Garbanati; Stefanie M Thomas; David R Freyer; Ann S Hamilton; Joel E Milam Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Anthony D Yang; Christopher M Quinn; D Brock Hewitt; Jeanette W Chung; Teresa R Zembower; Andrew Jones; Jo Buyske; David B Hoyt; Thomas J Nasca; Karl Y Bilimoria Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Sara Padidar; Shell-May Liao; Siphesihle Magagula; Themb'a A M Mahlaba; Nhlanhla M Nhlabatsi; Stephanie Lukas Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 3.240