ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
Profiling Healthcare Professionals' Digital Health Competence and Associated Factors: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Digital Health Competence and Attitudes Toward AI Among Health Care Professionals: Convergent Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess healthcare professionals' digital health competence and its associated factors.
designCross-sectional study.
methodsThe study was conducted from October 2023 to April 2024 among healthcare professionals in Italy, using convenience and snowball sampling. The questionnaire included four sections assessing: (i) socio-demographic and work-related characteristics; (ii) use of digital solutions as part of work and in free time, and communication channels to counsel clients in work; and DigiHealthCom and DigiComInf instruments including measurements of (iii) digital health competence and (iv) managerial, organisational and collegiality factors. K-means cluster analysis was employed to identify clusters of digital health competence; descriptive statistics to summarise characteristics and ANOVA and Chi-square tests to assess cluster differences.
resultsAmong 301 healthcare professionals, the majority were nurses (n = 287, 95.3%). Three clusters were identified: cluster 1 showing the lowest, cluster 2 moderate and cluster 3 the highest digital health competence. Most participants (n = 193, 64.1%) belonged to cluster 3. Despite their proficiency, clusters 2 and 3 scored significantly lower on ethical competence. Least digitally competent professionals had significantly higher work experience, while the most competent reported stronger support from management, organisation, and colleagues. Communication channels for counselling clients and digital device use, both at work and during free time, were predominantly traditional technologies.
conclusionEducational programmes and organisational policies prioritising digital health competence development are needed to advance digital transition and equity in the healthcare workforce. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION: Greater emphasis should be placed on the ethical aspects, with interventions tailored to healthcare professionals' digital health competence. Training and policies involving managers and colleagues, such as mentoring and distributed leadership, could help bridge the digital divide. Alongside traditional devices, the adoption of advanced technologies should be promoted. REPORTING
methodThis study adheres to the STROBE checklist. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: None.
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.