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
. 2021 Jul 8:3:690182.
doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2021.690182. eCollection 2021.

Attitudes Toward Health, Healthcare, and eHealth of People With a Low Socioeconomic Status: A Community-Based Participatory Approach

Affiliations

Attitudes Toward Health, Healthcare, and eHealth of People With a Low Socioeconomic Status: A Community-Based Participatory Approach

Jasper S Faber et al. Front Digit Health. .

Abstract

Low socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with a higher prevalence of unhealthy lifestyles compared to a high SES. Health interventions that promote a healthy lifestyle, like eHealth solutions, face limited adoption in low SES groups. To improve the adoption of eHealth interventions, their alignment with the target group's attitudes is crucial. This study investigated the attitudes of people with a low SES toward health, healthcare, and eHealth. We adopted a mixed-method community-based participatory research approach with 23 members of a community center in a low SES neighborhood in the city of Rotterdam, the Netherlands. We conducted a first set of interviews and analyzed these using a grounded theory approach resulting in a group of themes. These basic themes' representative value was validated and refined by an online questionnaire involving a different sample of 43 participants from multiple community centers in the same neighborhood. We executed three focus groups to validate and contextualize the results. We identified two general attitudes based on nine profiles toward health, healthcare, and eHealth. The first general attitude, optimistically engaged, embodied approximately half our sample and involved light-heartedness toward health, loyalty toward healthcare, and eagerness to adopt eHealth. The second general attitude, doubtfully disadvantaged, represented roughly a quarter of our sample and was related to feeling encumbered toward health, feeling disadvantaged within healthcare, and hesitance toward eHealth adoption. The resulting attitudes strengthen the knowledge of the motivation and behavior of people with low SES regarding their health. Our results indicate that negative health attitudes are not as evident as often claimed. Nevertheless, intervention developers should still be mindful of differentiating life situations, motivations, healthcare needs, and eHealth expectations. Based on our findings, we recommend eHealth should fit into the person's daily life, ensure personal communication, be perceived usable and useful, adapt its communication to literacy level and life situation, allow for meaningful self-monitoring and embody self-efficacy enhancing strategies.

Keywords: community-based participatory research; eHealth adoption; eHealth intervention design; health attitudes; health disparities; low socioeconomic status; user profiles.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Overview of project phases and corresponding methods, materials, and analysis products.
Figure 2
Figure 2
An example of the visual questionnaire distributed in phase 3. The storyboards represent the concepts found within the consciousness category.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(A) Radar graph of concept means of the attitude profiles toward health. (B) Radar graph of concept means of the attitude profiles toward healthcare. (C) Radar graph of concept means of the attitude profiles toward eHealth.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Overview of the general attitudes resulting from the principal component analysis and their corresponding profiles and concepts.

References

    1. Stringhini S, Sabia S, Shipley M, Brunner E, Nabi H, Kivimaki M, et al. . Association of socioeconomic position with health behaviors and mortality. JAMA. (2010) 303:1159–66. 10.1001/jama.2010.297 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Drewnowski A, Moudon AV, Jiao J, Aggarwal A, Charreire H, Chaix B. Food shopping behaviors and socioeconomic status. NIH Public Access. (2014) 38:306–14. 10.1038/ijo.2013.97 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mackenbach JP, Stirbu I, Roskam AJR, Schaap MM, Menvielle G, Leinsalu M, et al. . Socioeconomic inequalities in health in 22 European countries. N Engl J Med. (2008) 358:2468–81. 10.1056/NEJMsa0707519 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shishehbor MH, Litaker D, Pothier CE, Lauer MS. Association of socioeconomic status with functional capacity, heart rate recovery, all-cause mortality. J Am Med Assoc. (2006) 295:784–92. 10.1001/jama.295.7.784 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bull ER, Dombrowski SU, McCleary N, Johnston M. Are interventions for low-income groups effective in changing healthy eating, physical activity and smoking behaviours? A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. (2015) 4:1–9. 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006046 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources