There is a need to investigate which health information sources are used and trusted by people with limited health literacy to help identify strategies for addressing knowledge gaps that can contribute to preventable illness. We examined whether health literacy was associated with people’s use of and trust in a range of potential health information sources. Six hundred participants from a GfK Internet survey panel completed an online survey. We assessed health literacy using the Newest Vital Sign, the sources participants used to get health information, and the extent to which participants trusted health information from these sources. We performed multivariable regressions, controlling for demographic characteristics. Lower health literacy was associated with lower odds of using medical websites for health information and with higher odds of using television, social media, and blogs or celebrity webpages. People with lower health literacy were less likely to trust health information from specialist doctors and dentists, but more likely to trust television, social media, blogs/celebrity webpages, friends, and pharmaceutical companies. People with limited health literacy had higher rates of using and trusting sources such as social media and blogs, which might contain lower quality health information compared to information from healthcare professionals. Thus, it might be necessary to enhance the public’s ability to evaluate the quality of health information sources. The results of this study could be used to improve the reach of high-quality health information among people with limited health literacy and thereby increase the effectiveness of health communication programs and campaigns.
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine the differences in preventive behaviors of COVID-19 between urban and rural residents, as well as identify the factors that might contribute to such differences. Methods: Our online survey included 1591 participants from 31 provinces of China with 87% urban and 13% rural residents. We performed multiple linear regressions and path analysis to examine the relationship between rural status and behavioral intention, attitude, subjective norms, information appraisal, knowledge, variety of information source use, and preventive behaviors against COVID-19. Findings: Compared with urban residents, rural residents were less likely to perform preventive behaviors, more likely to hold a negative attitude toward the effectiveness of performing preventive behaviors, and more likely to have lower levels of information appraisal skills. We identified information appraisal as a significant factor that might contribute to the rural/urban differences in preventive behaviors against COVID-19 through attitude, subjective norms, and intention. We found no rural/urban differences in behavioral intention, subjective norms, knowledge about preventive behaviors, or the variety of interpersonal/media source use. Conclusions: As the first wave of the pandemic inundated urban areas, the current media coverage about COVID-19 prevention may not fully satisfy the specific needs of rural populations. Thus, rural residents were less likely to engage in a thoughtful process of information appraisal and adopt the appropriate preventive measures. Tailoring health messages to meet rural populations’ unique needs can be an effective strategy to promote preventive health behaviors against COVID-19.
About 21% of the U.S. population ages 5 and older speaks a language other than English at home, and many of them cannot communicate in English fluently. A possible intervention to improve health literacy for people with limited English proficiency is the use of an English as a second language curriculum. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the characteristics (e.g., theoretical framework, developing processes, classroom activities, goals and topics) and effectiveness of English as a second language health literacy curricula that are currently available in English-dominant countries. We searched the online databases of ERIC, Sage, Springer, PubMed, Medline, and Scopus, identifying 7 curricula within 18 published reports. We synthesize the strengths and weaknesses of the reviewed curricula and provide recommendations for improving future health literacy interventions and research.