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