4.4 Article

Cancer-related information seeking: Hints from the 2003 Health Information National Trends Survey

期刊

JOURNAL OF HEALTH COMMUNICATION
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 147-156

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10810730600637574

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Few nationally representative surveys have assessed the cancer-related information seeking behavior of the American public. Data for our analysis were from the 2003 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). The goals of our analysis were to characterize cancer information seekers (3,011) and nonseekers (3,348) in terms of sociodemographic, health care access, and health status variables, and to describe the nature of the cancer-related information being sought by information seekers. Significant and independent associations with seeking status were identified for gender, age, race, income, education, personal and family history of cancer, and having a usual source of health care. Information seekers were less likely to be male (OR = .51); aged 65 or older (OR = .40); Hispanic (OR = .60); to have a usual source of health care (OR = .70); and more likely to have incomes greater than $50,000 (OR = 1.50), some college (OR = 1.87) or a college degree (OR = 2.95), a prior cancer diagnosis (OR = 3.57), or a family history of cancer (OR = 2.17). Among cancer information seekers, the most frequently searched topic was cancer site-specific information (50.2%). Individuals who reported searching for cancer site-specific information were most frequently looking for information about breast cancer (23.8%), prostate cancer (11.5%), and skin cancer (11.3%). The HINTS survey provides a unique opportunity to explore the characteristics of information seekers and nonseekers and the content of information being sought by the public in a nationally representative sample; understanding gained from this effort provides generalizable and policy-relevant information about the American public's information needs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据