Israa Khaleel1, Barbara C Wimmer2, Gregory M Peterson2, Syed Tabish Razi Zaidi3, Erin Roehrer4, Elizabeth Cummings5, Kenneth Lee6. 1. Division of Pharmacy, School of Medicine, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia. Electronic address: israa.khaleel@utas.edu.au. 2. Division of Pharmacy, School of Medicine, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia. 3. Division of Pharmacy, School of Medicine, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia; School of Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom. 4. Discipline of ICT, School of Technology, Environments and Design, College of Sciences and Engineering, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia. 5. School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia. 6. Division of Pharmacy, School of Medicine, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia; Division of Pharmacy, School of Allied Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Western Australia, Western Australia, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine and identify the scope of research addressing health information overload in consumers. METHODS: In accordance with a published protocol, six electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO, Embase, and Scopus), reference lists of included articles, and grey literature (Google Advanced Search and WorldCat) were searched. Articles in English were included, without any limit on the date of publication. RESULTS: Of the 69 records included for final analysis, 22 studies specifically examined health information overload, whereas the remainder peripherally discussed the concept alongside other concepts. The 22 studies focused on one or more of the following: 1) ways to measure health information overload (multi-item/single-item scales); 2) predictors of health information overload - these included low education level, health literacy, and socioeconomic status; and 3) interventions to address information overload, such as videotaped consultations or written materials. Cancer information overload was a popular topic amongst studies that focused on information overload. CONCLUSION: Based on the identified studies, there is a clear need for future studies that investigate health information overload in consumers with chronic medical conditions other than cancer. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This review is the initial step in facilitating future efforts to create health information that do not overload consumers.
OBJECTIVE: To examine and identify the scope of research addressing health information overload in consumers. METHODS: In accordance with a published protocol, six electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO, Embase, and Scopus), reference lists of included articles, and grey literature (Google Advanced Search and WorldCat) were searched. Articles in English were included, without any limit on the date of publication. RESULTS: Of the 69 records included for final analysis, 22 studies specifically examined health information overload, whereas the remainder peripherally discussed the concept alongside other concepts. The 22 studies focused on one or more of the following: 1) ways to measure health information overload (multi-item/single-item scales); 2) predictors of health information overload - these included low education level, health literacy, and socioeconomic status; and 3) interventions to address information overload, such as videotaped consultations or written materials. Cancer information overload was a popular topic amongst studies that focused on information overload. CONCLUSION: Based on the identified studies, there is a clear need for future studies that investigate health information overload in consumers with chronic medical conditions other than cancer. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This review is the initial step in facilitating future efforts to create health information that do not overload consumers.
Authors: Jakob D Jensen; Jackilen Shannon; Ronaldo Iachan; Yangyang Deng; Sunny Jung Kim; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Babalola Faseru; Electra D Paskett; Jinxiang Hu; Robin C Vanderpool; DeAnn Lazovich; Jason A Mendoza; Sanjay Shete; Linda B Robertson; Rajesh Balkrishnan; Katherine J Briant; Benjamin Haaland; David A Haggstrom; Bernard F Fuemmeler Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2022-01-28 Impact factor: 4.090
Authors: Sandra O Borgmann; Veronika Gontscharuk; Jana Sommer; Michael Laxy; Nicole Ernstmann; Florian M Karl; Ina-Maria Rückert-Eheberg; Lars Schwettmann; Karl-Heinz Ladwig; Annette Peters; Andrea Icks Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2020-12-10 Impact factor: 3.295