OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to investigate access and use of technologies such as the Internet among Indiana's low-income population. The secondary objective was to determine whether access and use of computers significantly differed by age, race, and/or education level. METHODS: Data were collected from low-income adult Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Education participants for a 2-year period using a cross-sectional questionnaire about access and use of technology. RESULTS: Approximately 50% of the total respondents (n = 1,620) indicated that they had a working computer in their home, and of those, the majority (78%) had a high-speed Internet connection. Chi-square analysis revealed that younger adults who were white and had more education were more likely to have a computer (P < .001) and Internet. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study provide evidence that using Internet-based nutrition education in a low-income population is a viable and possibly cost-effective option.
OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to investigate access and use of technologies such as the Internet among Indiana's low-income population. The secondary objective was to determine whether access and use of computers significantly differed by age, race, and/or education level. METHODS: Data were collected from low-income adult Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Education participants for a 2-year period using a cross-sectional questionnaire about access and use of technology. RESULTS: Approximately 50% of the total respondents (n = 1,620) indicated that they had a working computer in their home, and of those, the majority (78%) had a high-speed Internet connection. Chi-square analysis revealed that younger adults who were white and had more education were more likely to have a computer (P < .001) and Internet. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study provide evidence that using Internet-based nutrition education in a low-income population is a viable and possibly cost-effective option.
Authors: Sarah Stotz; Angela G Brega; Steven Lockhart; Luciana E Hebert; J Neil Henderson; Yvette Roubideaux; Kelly Moore Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2020-07-17 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: Stephen Magura; Michael G Miller; Timothy Michael; Robert Bensley; Jason T Burkhardt; Anne Cullen Puente; Carolyn Sullins Journal: BMC Emerg Med Date: 2012-11-21