ArticleDigital health
eHealth literacy of patients attending a primary care clinic in Malaysia and its associated factors: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A study protocol evaluating the effectiveness of the older adult's digital health literacy (ODDHeaL) intervention.PloS one · 2026Trial
- Pilot implementation study of a web-based men's health screening app in primary care during COVID-19: a mixed-methods approach.BMC health services research · 2024Trial
- Factors Associated with e-Health Literacy Among Older Adults in Klang Valley, Malaysia: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Assessment of electronic health literacy and its associated factors among internet -using primary health care attendees in Mansoura district, Egypt: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- eHealth literacy in the general population: a cross-sectional study in China.BMC public health · 2025Article
- How do patients with high cardiovascular risk evaluate online health information? A qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: People are overloaded with online health information (OHI) of variable quality. eHealth literacy is important for people to acquire and appraise reliable information to make health-related decisions. While eHealth literacy is widely studied in developed countries, few studies have been conducted among patients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Objective: We aimed to determine the level of eHealth literacy in patients attending a primary care clinic in Malaysia and its associated factors. Methods: A cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire was conducted in an urban primary care clinic. We used a systematic random sampling method to select patients aged 18 years and above who attended the clinic. The eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS) was used to measure eHealth literacy. Results: A total of 381 participants were included. The mean eHEALS was 24.4 ± 7.6. The eHEALS statements related to skills in appraising OHI were scored lower than statements related to looking for online resources. Higher education level of attending upper secondary school (AOR 2.53, 95% CI 1.05-6.11), tertiary education (AOR 4.05, 95% CI 1.60-10.25), higher monthly household income of >US$470 (AOR 1.95, 95% CI 1.07-3.56), and those who had sought OHI in the past month (AOR 1.95, 95% CI 1.13-3.36) were associated with a higher eHealth literacy level. Conclusions: This study found a low eHealth literacy level among primary care patients in Malaysia. While the patients were confident in searching for OHI, they lacked skills in appraising them. Our findings inform the interventions for improving eHealth literacy in LMICs, especially educating the public about OHI appraisal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.