Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Mar 5;21(3):e11279.
doi: 10.2196/11279.

Characterizing the Digital Health Citizen: Mixed-Methods Study Deriving a New Typology

Affiliations

Characterizing the Digital Health Citizen: Mixed-Methods Study Deriving a New Typology

John Powell et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: A key challenge for health systems harnessing digital tools and services is that of digital inclusion. Typically, digital inequalities are conceptualized in relation to unequal access or usage. However, these differences do not fully explain differences in health behavior as a result of health-related internet use.

Objective: Our objective was to derive a new typology of health internet users based on their antecedent motivations and enablers, to explain how individuals' different orientations influence their health behavior.

Methods: We used a mixed-methods design using (1) qualitative data from 43 semistructured interviews about individuals' general and health-related internet use, and how this influenced their health perception and their help-seeking decisions, and (2) quantitative data from the Oxford Internet Surveys (OxIS), a household survey of 2150 adults in England about their internet use and other characteristics. We used the interview data to identify constructs that described motivations and enablers affecting how internet use shaped respondents' health perception and health service use. We then used these constructs to identify variables in OxIS, which provided a quantitative measure of these constructs. We then undertook a hierarchical cluster analysis of these constructs, using the numerical variables, to derive a proposed typology of health information seekers.

Results: Both the qualitative findings and the subsequent cluster analysis suggested the existence of 6 types of individuals, categorized as learners, pragmatists, skeptics, worriers, delegators, and adigitals. Learners had a strong desire to understand health better. They used the internet to make decisions about whether they needed to see a professional and to learn about their and others' health. Pragmatists primarily used the internet to decide whether seeing a doctor was worthwhile. Skeptics were skeptical of physicians and the medical system and valued the internet for solving health problems that doctors may not be able to deal with. Worriers found it difficult to interpret health information online, described health information seeking online as frightening, and reported a critical attitude toward online health information despite seeking it frequently. Delegators comprised nonusers and users valuing the internet as an information source, but not necessarily wanting or being able to use the internet themselves. Adigitals comprised many nonusers, but also users, who did not see the internet as a useful information tool and presented strong views on its low suitability for health care.

Conclusions: This research supports a shift in the understanding of the digital divide in health, away from only access and usage issues, toward also conceptualizing an outcomes divide, whereby different types of health behavior result from the differing orientations of internet users accessing online health information. This new typology can be used to inform digital inclusion policies in health systems.

Keywords: digital divide; digital inequalities; eHealth; health information seeking; health outcomes; health service use; perceived health.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Dendrogram for hierarchical clustering of typology. Percentages are from weighted Oxford Internet Surveys data.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Typology of health information seekers showing cluster dimensions. All values are mean [SD]. The diagram shows the divergence from the arithmetic mean for each of the clustering dimensions. All constructs are measured on 5-item Likert scales.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Crawford R, Emmerson C. NHS and social care funding: the outlook to 2021/22. Research report. London, UK: Nuffield Trust and Institute for Fiscal Studies; 2012. [2018-06-12]. https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/files/2017-01/nhs-social-care-funding-o... .
    1. Powell J, Newhouse N, Boylan A, Williams V. Digital health citizens and the future of the NHS. Digit Health. 2016 Oct 10;2:205520761667203. doi: 10.1177/2055207616672033. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. van Deursen AJ, van Dijk JA. The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media Soc. 2013 Jun 07;16(3):507–526. doi: 10.1177/1461444813487959. - DOI
    1. van Deursen AJ, Helsper EJ. The third-level digital divide: who benefits most from being online? In: Robinson L, Cotten SR, Schulz J, Hale TM, Williams A, editors. Communication and Information Technologies Annual: Digital Distinctions and Inequalities. Volume 10. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited; 2015. pp. 29–52.
    1. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Englesakis M, Rizo C, Stern A. Health related virtual communities and electronic support groups: systematic review of the effects of online peer to peer interactions. BMJ. 2004 May 15;328(7449):1166. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7449.1166. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/15142921 328/7449/1166 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types