Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Canadian Family Physician logoLink to Canadian Family Physician
. 2001 Sep;47:1759–1765.

Preventive health information on the Internet. Qualitative study of consumers' perspectives.

Y Quintana 1, J W Feightner 1, C N Wathen 1, L M Sangster 1, J N Marshall 1
PMCID: PMC2018558  PMID: 11570301

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore how best to make high-quality preventive health information available to consumers on the Internet. DESIGN: Focus groups. SETTING: Three urban workplaces and one local hospital with patients from a rural family medical practice. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-two men and 17 women patients. METHOD: Qualitative survey of four focus groups, analysis of transcripts and researchers' notes. MAIN FINDINGS: Five themes characterized participants' perceptions of a consumer website of evidence-based preventive guidelines: content expectations, website design, trustworthiness of content, marketing, and the implications of consumer health information on the Internet. CONCLUSION: Consumers want preventive health information both for taking care of themselves and for participating in a more informed way in their health care when they see a physician. Findings of this study reveal some ways in which consumers' use of Internet health information can affect physicians' and other health professionals' work.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (171.6 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bader S. A., Braude R. M. "Patient informatics": creating new partnerships in medical decision making. Acad Med. 1998 Apr;73(4):408–411. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199804000-00014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Basch C. E. Focus group interview: an underutilized research technique for improving theory and practice in health education. Health Educ Q. 1987 Winter;14(4):411–448. doi: 10.1177/109019818701400404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bero L. A., Jadad A. R. How consumers and policymakers can use systematic reviews for decision making. Ann Intern Med. 1997 Jul 1;127(1):37–42. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-127-1-199707010-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cassell M. M., Jackson C., Cheuvront B. Health communication on the Internet: an effective channel for health behavior change? J Health Commun. 1998 Jan-Mar;3(1):71–79. doi: 10.1080/108107398127517. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Coiera E. Information epidemics, economics, and immunity on the internet. We still know so little about the effect of information on public health. BMJ. 1998 Nov 28;317(7171):1469–1470. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7171.1469. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Entwistle V. A., Watt I. S., Davis H., Dickson R., Pickard D., Rosser J. Developing information materials to present the findings of technology assessments to consumers. The experience of the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1998 Winter;14(1):47–70. doi: 10.1017/s0266462300010527. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Eysenbach G., Diepgen T. L. Towards quality management of medical information on the internet: evaluation, labelling, and filtering of information. BMJ. 1998 Nov 28;317(7171):1496–1500. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7171.1496. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Graber M. A., Roller C. M., Kaeble B. Readability levels of patient education material on the World Wide Web. J Fam Pract. 1999 Jan;48(1):58–61. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Impicciatore P., Pandolfini C., Casella N., Bonati M. Reliability of health information for the public on the World Wide Web: systematic survey of advice on managing fever in children at home. BMJ. 1997 Jun 28;314(7098):1875–1879. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7098.1875. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Izenberg N., Lieberman D. A. The Web, communication trends, and children's health. Part 3: The Web and health consumers. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 1998 May;37(5):275–285. doi: 10.1177/000992289803700501. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Jadad A. R., Gagliardi A. Rating health information on the Internet: navigating to knowledge or to Babel? JAMA. 1998 Feb 25;279(8):611–614. doi: 10.1001/jama.279.8.611. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. McClung H. J., Murray R. D., Heitlinger L. A. The Internet as a source for current patient information. Pediatrics. 1998 Jun;101(6):E2–E2. doi: 10.1542/peds.101.6.e2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Patrick K. How patients use the web for second opinions. West J Med. 1999 Jun;170(6):332–333. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Pemberton P. J., Goldblatt J. The Internet and the changing roles of doctors, patients and families. Med J Aust. 1998 Dec 7;169(11-12):594–595. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1998.tb123428.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Richards B., Colman A. W., Hollingsworth R. A. The current and future role of the Internet in patient education. Int J Med Inform. 1998 Jun;50(1-3):279–285. doi: 10.1016/s1386-5056(98)00083-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Robinson T. N., Patrick K., Eng T. R., Gustafson D. An evidence-based approach to interactive health communication: a challenge to medicine in the information age. Science Panel on Interactive Communication and Health. JAMA. 1998 Oct 14;280(14):1264–1269. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.14.1264. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Shepperd S., Charnock D., Gann B. Helping patients access high quality health information. BMJ. 1999 Sep 18;319(7212):764–766. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7212.764. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Silberg W. M., Lundberg G. D., Musacchio R. A. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor--Let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA. 1997 Apr 16;277(15):1244–1245. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Winker M. A., Flanagin A., Chi-Lum B., White J., Andrews K., Kennett R. L., DeAngelis C. D., Musacchio R. A. Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet: principles governing AMA web sites. American Medical Association. JAMA. 2000 Mar 22;283(12):1600–1606. doi: 10.1001/jama.283.12.1600. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Wyatt J. C. Commentary: measuring quality and impact of the World Wide Web. BMJ. 1997 Jun 28;314(7098):1879–1881. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7098.1879. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Canadian Family Physician are provided here courtesy of College of Family Physicians of Canada

RESOURCES