ArticleBMC nursing2026
Exploring the status and influencing factors of nurses' digital health literacy: a scoping review.
Article in BMC 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.
- Symptom management in cancer care: An evolutionary concept analysis for a digitally enabled collaborative framework.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Review
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
backgroundThe utilization of digital health technologies (DHT) among nurses remains notably low, primarily due to limited digital health literacy (DHL). Enhancing DHL among nursing staff is essential for improving healthcare delivery. Despite its importance, a comprehensive synthesis of existing literature on this subject is still lacking.
objectiveThis scoping review aims to summarize the current status, measurement instruments, and strategies to enhance nurses’ DHL, while identifying and categorizing influencing factors within a structured framework.
methodsA scoping review was conducted following a systematic search in PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, WanFang, CNKI, and VIP from inception to January 2025. Supplementary manual searches were updated in November 2025 to identify additional eligible studies published between February and November 2025, and the final eligibility cutoff for inclusion was November 2025.
resultsA total of 21 studies were included, predominantly conducted in high-income and upper-middle-income countries. The reported formats and levels of nurses’ DHL varied considerably, generally indicating low proficiency. Only four general measurement tools were identified for assessing nurses’ DHL. Factors associated with DHL among nurses were categorized into three levels based on the social ecological model: individual, interpersonal, and organizational. Furthermore, included studies suggested a model-based mediating role for DHL at the individual level, with higher DHL linked to multiple positive outcomes. Only one study proposed a training program aimed at improving nurses’ DHL; however, its effectiveness remains unverified.
conclusionsResearch on nurses’ DHL is still emerging. There is an urgent need to develop a nursing-specific conceptual model, a standardized assessment framework, and dynamic measurement tools responsive to evolving Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 technologies. The integrated framework of influencing factors derived from the social ecological model provides a theoretical foundation and practical guidance for nursing leaders and researchers to develop targeted, multilevel interventions aimed at enhancing nurses’ DHL. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework website (OSF.IO/N9HWQ).
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.