Paging Dr. Google: Does technology fill the gap created by the prenatal care visit structure qualitative focus group study with pregnant women

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Volumn 16, Issue 6, 2014, Pages

  Kraschnewski, Jennifer L ^a   Chuang, Cynthia H ^a   Poole, Erika S ^b   Peyton, Tamara ^b   Blubaugh, Ian ^a   Pauli, Jaimey ^a   Feher, Alyssa ^c   Reddy, Madhu ^b  

^a PENN STATE COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c Family Health Council of Central Pennsylvania   (United States)

Author keywords

Consumer health informatics; Internet; Mhealth; Mobile phones; Patient education; Pregnancy resources; Prenatal care; Qualitative research; Smartphones; Women infants and children Program

Indexed keywords

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATIENT CARE; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL CARE; PROCEDURES; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SEARCH ENGINE; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; HUMANS; PATIENT-CENTERED CARE; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL CARE; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SEARCH ENGINE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84906248446     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14388871     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2196/jmir.3385     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Grimes HA, Forster DA, Newton MS. Sources of information used by women during pregnancy to meet their information needs. Midwifery 2014 Jan;30(1):e26-e33. [doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2013.10.007] [Medline: 24246969]
2. Public Health Agency of Canada. What Mothers Say: The Canadian Maternity Experiences Survey. 2009. URL: http://www.phac-Aspc.gc.ca/rhs-ssg/survey-eng.php [accessed 2014-05-28] [WebCite Cache ID 6PudMEJdu]
3. Hesse BW, Nelson DE, Kreps GL, Croyle RT, Arora NK, Rimer BK, et al. Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the Internet and its implications for health care providers: findings from the first Health Information National Trends Survey. Arch Intern Med 2005;165(22):2618-2624. [doi: 10.1001/archinte.165.22.2618] [Medline: 16344419]
4. Ybarra M, Suman M. Reasons, assessments and actions taken: sex and age differences in uses of Internet health information. Health Educ Res 2008 Jun;23(3):512-521 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1093/her/cyl062] [Medline: 16880222]
5. Shieh C, Broome ME, Stump TE. Factors associated with health information-seeking in low-income pregnant women. Women Health 2010 Jul;50(5):426-442. [doi: 10.1080/03630242.2010.506152] [Medline: 20853218]
6. Kaimal AJ, Cheng YW, Bryant AS, Norton ME, Shaffer BL, Caughey AB. Google obstetrics: who is educating our patients? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008 Jun;198(6):682.e1-682.e5. [doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.03.030] [Medline: 18538152]
7. Duggan M, Smith A. Pew Research Internet Project. 2013 Dec 30. Social Media Update 2013 URL: http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/12/30/social-media- update-2013/[accessed 2014-05-28] [WebCite Cache ID 6PudjKue7]
8. Lagan BM, Sinclair M, Kernohan WG. What is the impact of the Internet on decision-making in pregnancy? A global study. Birth 2011 Dec;38(4):336-345. [doi: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2011.00488.x] [Medline: 22112334]
9. Institute of Medicine. In: Briere R, editor. Crossing the Quality Chasm. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press; 2001.
10. Dowswell T, Carroli G, Duley L, Gates S, Gülmezoglu AM, Khan-Neelofur D, et al. Alternative versus standard packages of antenatal care for low-risk pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010(10):CD000934. [doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000934.pub2] [Medline: 20927721]
11. Novick G. CenteringPregnancy and the current state of prenatal care. J Midwifery Womens Health 2004;49(5):405-411. [doi: 10.1016/j.jmwh.2004.06.001] [Medline: 15351330]
12. Alexander GR, Kotelchuck M. Assessing the role and effectiveness of prenatal care: history, challenges, and directions for future research. Public Health Rep 2001;116(4):306-316 [FREE Full text] [Medline: 12037259]
13. Kirkham C, Harris S, Grzybowski S. Evidence-based prenatal care: Part I. General prenatal care and counseling issues. Am Fam Physician 2005 Apr 1;71(7):1307-1316 [FREE Full text] [Medline: 15832534]
14. Johnson K, Posner SF, Biermann J, Cordero JF, Atrash HK, Parker CS, CDC/ATSDR Preconception Care Work Group, Select Panel on Preconception Care. Recommendations to improve preconception health and health care-United States. A report of the CDC/ATSDR Preconception Care Work Group and the Select Panel on Preconception Care. MMWR Recomm Rep 2006 Apr 21;55(RR-6):1-23 [FREE Full text] [Medline: 16617292]
15. Sikorski J, Wilson J, Clement S, Das S, Smeeton N. A randomised controlled trial comparing two schedules of antenatal visits: the antenatal care project. BMJ 1996 Mar 2;312(7030):546-553 [FREE Full text] [Medline: 8595286]
16. McDuffie RJr, Beck A, Bischoff K, Cross J, Orleans M. Effect of frequency of prenatal care visits on perinatal outcome among low-risk women. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1996 Mar 20;275(11):847-851. [Medline: 8596222]
17. Shakespear K, Waite PJ, Gast J. A comparison of health behaviors of women in centering pregnancy and traditional prenatal care. Matern Child Health J 2010 Mar;14(2):202-208. [doi: 10.1007/s10995-009-0448-3] [Medline: 19184385]
18. Norman CD, Skinner HA. eHealth Literacy: Essential Skills for Consumer Health in a Networked World. J Med Internet Res 2006;8(2):e9 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.8.2.e9] [Medline: 16867972]
19. Neter E, Brainin E. eHealth literacy: extending the digital divide to the realm of health information. J Med Internet Res 2012;14(1):e19 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.1619] [Medline: 22357448]
20. Lagan BM, Sinclair M, Kernohan WG. A Web-based survey of midwives' perceptions of women using the Internet in pregnancy: a global phenomenon. Midwifery 2011 Apr;27(2):273-281. [doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2009.07.002] [Medline: 19700228]