Skip to main content

Table 2 Overview of the identified studies

From: Correction to: Diabetes-related information-seeking behaviour: a systematic review

Author/Year Design/ Method Recruitment
setting
Sample size Population Study focus Findings Critical appraisal Number of criteria*
Age Sex Type of DM** (and duration) Region
Quantitative studies
Enwald et al. 2012 [22] Cross-sectional study (questionnaire within an experimental study) Register of the University of Oulu, medical records of health centres n=72 Mainly >60 f, m Risk of T2D (defined as pre-diabetes) Finland Relation between physiological measurements (BMI, fitness level) and information needs and information behaviour BMI and fitness level of pre-diabetic patients are associated with information-seeking behaviour + 2pp, 8p, 0m, 0NR, 9NA
Giménez-Pérez et al. 2015 [38] Cross-sectional study (questionnaire) Endocrinology unit of a university hospital n=289 Average 43 f, m T1D for at least 1 year Spain Health-related use of Internet technologies Use of new Internet technologies among patients with T1D is low, e-mail preferred channel of communication with HCP + 2pp, 8p, 0m, 0NR, 9NA
Hyman et al. 2012 [10] Cross-sectional study (questionnaire) Poster, community health centre, DM education centre, specialized clinic, Canadian Diabetes Association n=184 Average: Immigrants 51,2, Cana-dian-born 52,3 f, m Self-reported T2D Canada (Toronto) Self-management, health service use and information-seeking behaviour of recent immigrants and Canadian-born Differences in performing self-management (regular blood glucose and foot checks) and perception of health service between immigrants and Canadian-born + 3pp, 6p, 0m, 1NR, 9NA
Jamal et al. 2015 [36] Cross-sectional study (questionnaire) University Medical City (teaching hospitals) n=344 Adults (>16 years old) f, m T2D Saudi Arabia (Riyadh) Online health information-seeking behaviour of people with T2D Physicians and television preferred sources + 3pp, 5p, 0m, 2NR, 9NA
Kalantzi et al. 2015 [5] Cross-sectional study (questionnaire) Outpatient clinic n=203 Adults (>18 years old) f, m T1D, T2D Greece (Athens) Information-seeking behaviour of people with DM, information needs, Internet use, obstacles to information seeking Diet and complication are most important needs; the physician is a preferred source; Internet is not that important; most frequently barriers mentioned are costs and lack of time + 2pp, 7p, 1m, 0NR 9NA,
Lui et al. 2014 [41] Baseline phase of a longitudinal study
(questionnaire)
Australian government initiative n=3652 56-70 f, m T2D Australia (Queensland) Correlation between health and social characteristics and Internet use Internet use associated with age, socioeconomic characteristics, duration, poor metabolic control and comorbidities + 4pp, 6p, 0m, 0NR, 9NA
Nordfeldt et al. 2005 [23] Cross-sectional study (questionnaire) Paediatric clinics n=90 5-20 f, m T1D for at least 1,5 years Sweden Internet health information seeking behaviour of children and adolescents with T1D, motivation, satisfaction Many use internet for health information seeking and share it with others. ‘Searchers’ with shorter duration. Need for more and better Internet information + 4pp, 4p, 0m, 2NR, 9NA
Robertson et al. 2005 [24] Cross-sectional study (question-naire) Diabetes centres n=70 16-79 f, m T1D, T2D United Kingdom
(Glasgow)
Information source of people with DM, satisfaction Verbal information from healthcare professional is preferred, Internet use connected with age and educational level +/- 0pp, 6p, 3m, 1NR, 9NA
Sayakhot and Carolan-Olah 2016 [42] Cross-sectional study (questionnaire) Diabetes clinic n=116 18-43 f GDM Australia (Victoria) Information sources and satisfaction of women with GDM HCP, diabetes groups and Internet preferred sources; correlation between age and place of birth and Internet use; mostly satisfied with process of diagnosis + 2pp, 8p, 0m, 0NR, 9NA
Shaw and Johnson 2011 [25] Cross-sectional study (questionnaire) Flyers in primary care clinics and libraries n=57 Adults (>21 years) f, m T2D USA (Sub-urban, rural south-eastern) Online health information seeking behaviour of people with DM Majority use Internet for health information seeking; many use social networks like Facebook or MySpace and discuss in chats - 0pp, 6p, 4m, 0NR 9NA
Yamamoto et al. 2011 [26] Cross-sectional study (questionnaire) Diabetes clinics n=137 20-75 NR T1D for at least 6 months Japan Information about islet transplantation in people with T1D, associated factors, sources Main sources are magazines and broadcast media; physicians are a preferred source of information, but mostly they do not have sufficient information about islet transplantation + 4pp, 5p, 1m, 0NR, 9NA
Zare-Farashbandi et al 2016 Cross-sectional study (questionnaire) Ten health centres under the super-vision of the Deputy of Health of Isfahan Province n= 362 20-82 f,m Risk of T2D (defined as pre-diabetes), GDM, T2DM Iran (Isfahan) Effect of contextual factors on the health information–seeking behaviour of people with diabetes An association between the time passed since diagnosis and information-seeking behaviour. + 0pp, 8p, 0m, 2NR, 9NA
Qualitative studies
Connolly and Crosby 2014 [27] Focus group Qualified health centre n=25 Average 54 f, m Not defined Hawaii E-health literacy of individuals from a medically underserved area in Hawaii Low e-health literacy level, often access to Internet without use for health information seeking, often ability to handle when information missing + 8/14
Fergie et al. 2015 [37] Interview Online, organizations for young adults, other participants n=20 T2DM n= 40 people with common mental health disorders 18-30 f, m Not defined United Kingdom
(Glasgow)
Online information seeking behaviour of young people with DM or common mental health disorders Internet preferred source of information for many participants; differences between professionally produced and social media sites + 12/14
Kilgour et al. 2015 [39] Interview Tertiary referral hospital n=13 29-41 f GDM Australia (Queensland) Postnatal follow-up and communication experiences of women with GDM Need for accurate information and possibility to discuss information with HCP ++ 13/14
Longo et al. 2010 [9] Focus group (5-8 parti-cipants each session) Clinic n=46 48-77 f, m T1D, T2D American midwestern city Health information seeking and use, information source, active seeking and passive seeking Passive attainment of information is important; Internet for active seeking, relationships and healthcare professionals help to understand information + 12/14
Low et al. 2016 [40] Interview, Focus group Public and private primary care clinics n=12
n=9 family member
n=5 Health care professionals
50-62 f, m T2D Malaysia Influence of social networks on help-seeking behaviour of people with T2D Important influences from family, friends, HCP ++ 13/14
Meyfroidt et al. 2013 [29] Focus group (6 groups) Community health centre, solo and group practices n=21 41-85 f, m T2D Belgium (Brussels) Seeking and use of information sources of people with DM, active and passive seeking over time General practitioner is the most important source, healthcare professionals are most reliable ++ 14/14
Milewski and Chen 2010 [30] Interview Outpatient clinic, flyers n=19 NR f, m T2D USA (Southern California) Information seeking behaviour of people with DM, barriers of information use 5 barriers identified: ‘Motivation fade over time’, ‘Passively Seeking Information’, ‘Inconsistency of Information’, ‘Generality of Information’, ‘Loss of Information’ + 11/14
Moonaghi et al. 2014 [28] Interview NR n=15 Average 51 f, m T2D for at least a year Iran
(Tabriz)
Health information-seeking behaviour of Iranian DM patients Social context important for decision making and information seeking behaviour ++ 13/14
Newton et al. 2012 [31] Interview (N=25),
focus group (N=12),
questionnaire (N=6)
DM support group n=37 Mainly >60 f, m T2D England/UK (Inner London district) Information seeking and use of mainly older people with DM from a structurally lacking area, motivation, sources Seeking and use is influenced by social resources and context, which are important for effective and high quality care. Second most important factor is the duration of disease + 9/14
Wilson 2013 [32] Survey (questionnaire) Email of insulin pump therapy group n=30 22-64 f,m T1D, T2D United Kingdom (Glasgow) Internet health information seeking of people with long-term DM Internet used for general questions, healthcare professionals for more specific needs - 5/14
Mixed-methods studies
Morgan and Trauth 2013 [33] Interviews Database of Pennsylvania State University Institute for Diabetes and Obesity, investigator contacts n=30 Adults (>18 years) f, m T1D, T2D for at least a year USA (Central Pennsylvania and Southern Maryland) Online health information seeking and the demographic influence using a theoretical model Seeking behaviour is influenced by different factors such as access to healthcare providers, seeking success or the social network + 9/21 (8NA, 1NR)
Sparud-Lundin et al. 2011 [34] Survey (question-naire) Antenatal clinics n=105 30-36 f T1D Sweden Online health information seeking behaviour, use and information needs of childbearing women, expectations for future online possibilities Many women with T1D seek health information online, particularly during pregnancy, precise expectations of web-based support + 8/21 (8NA)
St Jean 2012 [12] Question-naire, interviews, card-sorting techniques University websites, flyers at clinics and support group meetings n=34 32-81 f, m T2D USA, (Michigan) Information behaviour of people with DM, associated factors, that facilitate or hinder their diabetes-related information seeking and use Participants often did not know their information needs until they found information about it. Some mentioned avoidance in the beginning. Different factors, time included, influencing information seeking behaviour ++ 11/21 (8NA)
St Jean 2014 [13] Question-naire, interviews, card-sorting techniques University websites, flyers at clinics and support group meetings n=34 32-81 f, m T2D USA, (Michigan) Information behaviour of people with DM, associated factors, that facilitate or hinder their diabetes-related information seeking and use The new type of card-sorting technique was well accepted by the study participants; the combination of the card-sorting technique and think aloud protocol within this technique generated contextually rich data about people's diabetes course + 7/21 (13NA)
St Jean 2016 [35] Question-naire, interviews, card-sorting techniques University websites, flyers at clinics and support group meetings n=34 32-81 f, m T2D USA, (Michigan) Information behaviour of people with DM, associated factors, that facilitate or hinder their diabetes-related information seeking and use This study showed several types of factors (physical, social, affective, and cognitive) that may facilitate, hinder, or impede the health-related information seeking + 6/21 (12NA)
Weymann et al. 2016 [43] Semi-structured interviews, questionnaire University Hospital, self-help groups, self-help associations n=10 (interviews)
n=178 (questionnaire)
36-86 f, m T2D Germany Internet use, knowledge and information and support needs of people with T2D Majority uses internet, no correlation between age and internet use, diabetes knowledge low, desire for shared decision-making + 6/21 (8NA, 3NR)
  1. Quality rating (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence 2012):
  2. ‘(++) — all or most of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled, where they have not been fulfilled the conclusions are very unlikely to alter; (+) — some of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled, where they have not been fulfilled, or not adequately described, the conclusions are unlikely to alter; (-) — few or no checklist criteria have been fulfilled and the conclusions are likely or very likely to alter.’
  3. Key criteria (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence 2012):
  4. pp: ‘Indicates that for that particular aspect of study design, the study has been designed or conducted in such a way as to minimise the risk of bias.’
  5. p: ‘Indicates that either the answer to the checklist question is not clear from the way the study is reported, or that the study may not have addressed all potential sources of bias for that particular aspect of study design.’
  6. m: ‘Should be reserved for those aspects of the study design in which significant sources of bias may persist.’
  7. NR (not reported): ‘Should be reserved for those aspects in which the study under review fails to report how they have (or might have) been considered.’
  8. NA (not applicable): ‘Should be reserved for those study design aspects that are not applicable given the study design under review (for example, allocation concealment would not be applicable for case–control studies).’
  9. T1D: Type 1 diabetes; T2D: Type 2 diabetes; GDM: Gestational diabetes