How do healthcare consumers process and evaluate comparative healthcare information? A qualitative study using cognitive interviews

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To date, online public healthcare reports have not been effectively used by consumers. Therefore, we qualitatively examined how healthcare consumers process and evaluate comparative healthcare information on the Internet.</p> &...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Delnoij Diana MJ (Author), Rademakers Jany (Author), Hendriks Michelle (Author), Damman Olga C (Author), Groenewegen Peter P (Author)
Format: Book
Published: BMC, 2009-11-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_d4e89a6730e848b69c09105b10e7c55e
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Delnoij Diana MJ  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Rademakers Jany  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Hendriks Michelle  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Damman Olga C  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Groenewegen Peter P  |e author 
245 0 0 |a How do healthcare consumers process and evaluate comparative healthcare information? A qualitative study using cognitive interviews 
260 |b BMC,   |c 2009-11-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 10.1186/1471-2458-9-423 
500 |a 1471-2458 
520 |a <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To date, online public healthcare reports have not been effectively used by consumers. Therefore, we qualitatively examined how healthcare consumers process and evaluate comparative healthcare information on the Internet.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Using semi-structured cognitive interviews, interviewees (n = 20) were asked to think aloud and answer questions, as they were prompted with three Dutch web pages providing comparative healthcare information.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We identified twelve themes from consumers' thoughts and evaluations. These themes were categorized under four important areas of interest: (1) a response to the design; (2) a response to the information content; (3) the use of the information, and (4) the purpose of the information.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Several barriers to an effective use of comparative healthcare information were identified, such as too much information and the ambiguity of terms presented on websites. Particularly important for future research is the question of how comparative healthcare information can be integrated with alternative information, such as patient reviews on the Internet. Furthermore, the readability of quality of care concepts is an issue that needs further attention, both from websites and communication experts.</p> 
546 |a EN 
690 |a Public aspects of medicine 
690 |a RA1-1270 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n BMC Public Health, Vol 9, Iss 1, p 423 (2009) 
787 0 |n http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/9/423 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/d4e89a6730e848b69c09105b10e7c55e  |z Connect to this object online.