Gender differences in searching for health information on the internet and the virtual patient-physician relationship in Germany: Exploratory results on how men and women differ and why

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2015, Pages e156-

  Bidmon, Sonja ^a   Terlutter, Ralf ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KLAGENFURT   (Austria)

Author keywords

Gender differences; General practitioners; Information seeking behavior; Physician patient relations; Statistical factor analysis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BEHAVIOR; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; GERMANY; HUMAN; INFORMATION SEEKING; INTERNET; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; PHYSICIAN; QUESTIONNAIRE; SEX DIFFERENCE; UTILIZATION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COMMUNICATION; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTITIONERS; GERMANY; HUMANS; INFORMATION SEEKING BEHAVIOR; INTENTION; INTERNET; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; PHYSICIANS; SEX FACTORS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84936766933     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14388871     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2196/jmir.4127     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. Marton C, Wei Choo C. A review of theoretical models of health information seeking on the web. Journal of Documentation 2012 Apr 20;68(3):330-352. [doi: 10.1108/00220411211225575]
2. Fox S. The social life of health information. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2011 May 12. URL: http://www.pewinternet.org/-/media//Files/Reports/2011/PIP-Social-Life-of-Health-Info.pdf [accessed 2013-11-20] [WebCite Cache ID 6LGpMcwCG]
3. Rice RE. Influences, usage, and outcomes of Internet health information searching: multivariate results from the Pew surveys. Int J Med Inform 2006 Jan;75(1):8-28 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2005.07.032] [Medline: 16125453]
4. Iverson SA, Howard KB, Penney BK. Impact of internet use on health-related behaviors and the patient-physician relationship: a survey-based study and review. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2008 Dec;108(12):699-711 [FREE Full text] [Medline: 19075034]
5. Umefjord G, Sandström H, Malker H, Petersson G. Medical text-based consultations on the Internet: a 4-year study. Int J Med Inform 2008 Feb;77(2):114-121. [doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2007.01.009] [Medline: 17317292]
6. Beck F, Richard JB, Nguyen-Thanh V, Montagni I, Parizot I, Renahy E. Use of the internet as a health information resource among French young adults: results from a nationally representative survey. J Med Internet Res 2014;16(5):e128 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.2934] [Medline: 24824164]
7. Moick M, Terlutter R. Physicians' motives for professional internet use and differences in attitudes toward the internet-informed patient, physician-patient communication, and prescribing behavior. Med 2 0 2012;1(2):e2 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/med20.1996] [Medline: 25075230]
8. Terlutter R, Bidmon S, Röttl J. Who uses physician-rating websites? Differences in sociodemographic variables, psychographic variables, and health status of users and nonusers of physician-rating websites. J Med Internet Res 2014;16(3):e97 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.3145] [Medline: 24686918]
9. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterley 2003;27(3):425-478.
10. Ajzen I. From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior. Berlin: Springer; 1985.
11. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1991 Dec;50(2):179-211. [doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T]
12. Davis FD. A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results. (PhD dissertation). Cambridge, MA: MIT Sloan School of Management; 1986. URL: http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/15192 [accessed 2014-05-29] [WebCite Cache ID 6Pvwb5Y2O]
13. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science 2000 Feb 01;46(2):186-204. [doi: 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926]
14. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: development and test. Decision Sciences 1996 Sep;27(3):451-481 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00860.x]
15. Dutta-Bergman MJ. Health attitudes, health cognitions, and health behaviors among Internet health information seekers: population-based survey. J Med Internet Res 2004 May 28;6(2):e15 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.6.2.e15] [Medline: 15249264]
16. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1980.
17. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub Co; 1975.
18. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Ackerman PL. A longitudinal field investigation of gender differences in individual technology adoption decision-making processes. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 2000 Sep;83(1):33-60. [doi: 10.1006/obhd.2000.2896] [Medline: 10973782]
19. Porter CE, Donthu N. Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine Internet usage: The role of perceived access barriers and demographics. Journal of Business Research 2006 Sep;59(9):999-1007. [doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.06.003]
20. Davis FD, Venkatesh V. A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in the technology acceptance model: three experiments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 1996 Jul;45(1):19-45 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1006/ijhc.1996.0040]
21. Subramanian GH. A replication of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use measurement. Decision Sciences 1994 Sep;25(5-6):863-874 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1994.tb01873.x]
22. Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 1993 Mar;38(3):475-487 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1006/imms.1993.1022]
23. Kim D, Chang H. Key functional characteristics in designing and operating health information websites for user satisfaction: an application of the extended technology acceptance model. Int J Med Inform 2007;76(11-12):790-800. [doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.09.001] [Medline: 17049917]
24. Bruner II GC, Kumar A. Explaining consumer acceptance of handheld Internet devices. Journal of Business Research 2005 May;58(5):553-558. [doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2003.08.002]
25. Furnham A, Kirkcaldy B. Age and sex differences in health beliefs and behaviours. Psychol Rep 1997 Feb;80(1):63-66. [doi: 10.2466/pr0.1997.80.1.63] [Medline: 9122353]
26. Schätzer M, Rust P, Elmadfa I. Fruit and vegetable intake in Austrian adults: intake frequency, serving sizes, reasons for and barriers to consumption, and potential for increasing consumption. Public Health Nutr 2010 Apr;13(4):480-487. [doi: 10.1017/S136898000999142X] [Medline: 19807933]
27. Dehghan M, Akhtar-Danesh N, Merchant AT. Factors associated with fruit and vegetable consumption among adults. J Hum Nutr Diet 2011 Apr;24(2):128-134. [doi: 10.1111/j.1365-277X.2010.01142.x] [Medline: 21332835]
28. Johnson RL. Gender differences in health-promoting lifestyles of African Americans. Public Health Nurs 2005;22(2):130-137. [doi: 10.1111/j.0737-1209.2005.220206.x] [Medline: 15860068]
29. Smith KLW, Matheson FI, Moineddin R, Dunn JR, Lu H, Cairney J, et al. Gender differences in mental health service utilization among respondents reporting depression in a national health survey. Health 2013 Oct;05(10):1561-1571 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.4236/health.2013.510212]
30. Green CA, Pope CR. Gender, psychosocial factors and the use of medical services: a longitudinal analysis. Social Science & Medicine 1999 May;48(10):1363-1372. [doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00440-7] [Medline: 10369437]
31. Hoefkens C, Verbeke W, Van Camp J. European consumers' perceived importance of qualifying and disqualifying nutrients in food choices. Food Quality and Preference 2011 Sep;22(6):550-558. [doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.03.002]
32. Ahmed F, Al-Radhwan L, Al-Azmi GZS, Al-Beajan M. Association between stress and dietary behaviours among undergraduate students in Kuwait: gender differences. Journal of Nutrition and Health Sciences 2014 May;1(1):14-16 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.15744/2393-9060.1.104]
33. Sharma B, Harker M, Harker D, Reinhard K. Youth transition to university in Germany and Australia: an empirical investigation of healthy eating behaviour. Journal of Youth Studies 2010 Jun;13(3):353-367. [doi: 10.1080/13676260903447510]
34. Solomon MR. Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having and Being. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2014.
35. Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of Web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34] [Medline: 15471760]
36. Wirtz M. Über das Problem fehlender Werte: Wie der Einfluss fehlender Informationen auf Analyseergebnisse entdeckt und reduziert werden kann [On the problem of missing data: how to identify and reduce the impact of missing data on findings of data analysis]. Rehabilitation 2004 Apr;43(2):109-115. [doi: 10.1055/s-2003-814839] [Medline: 15100920]
37. Bidmon S, Terlutter R, Röttl J. What explains usage of mobile physician-rating apps? Results from a web-based questionnaire. J Med Internet Res 2014;16(6):e148 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.3122] [Medline: 24918859]
38. Norman CD, Skinner HA. eHEALS: The eHealth Literacy Scale. J Med Internet Res 2006;8(4):e27 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.8.4.e27] [Medline: 17213046]
39. 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]
40. Wilson M. A conceptual framework for studying gender in information systems research. J Inf Technol 2004 Mar;19(1):81-92. [doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000008]
41. Moorman C, Matulich E. A model of consumers' preventive health behaviors: the role of health motivation and health ability. J Consum Res 1993 Sep;20(2):208-228. [doi: 10.1086/209344]
42. Kummervold PE, Chronaki CE, Lausen B, Prokosch HU, Rasmussen J, Santana S, et al. eHealth trends in Europe 2005-2007: a population-based survey. J Med Internet Res 2008;10(4):e42 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.1023] [Medline: 19017584]
43. Kamel Boulos MN, Wheeler S. The emerging Web 2.0 social software: an enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and health care education. Health Info Libr J 2007 Mar;24(1):2-23. [doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2007.00701.x]
44. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science 1989 Aug;35(8):982-1003. [doi: 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982]
45. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. J Appl Soc Psychol 1992 Jul;22(14):1111-1132. [doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x]
46. Venkatesh V, Speier C, Morris MG. User acceptance enablers in individual decision making about technology: toward an integrated model. Decision Sciences 2002 Mar;33(2):297-316 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2002.tb01646.x]
47. Hughes B, Joshi I, Lemonde H, Wareham J. Junior physician's use of Web 2.0 for information seeking and medical education: a qualitative study. Int J Med Inform 2009 Oct;78(10):645-655. [doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2009.04.008] [Medline: 19501017]
48. Sechrest RC. The internet and the physician-patient relationship. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010 Oct;468(10):2566-2571 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1440-3] [Medline: 20574803]
49. Bennett NL, Casebeer LL, Zheng S, Kristofco R. Information-seeking behaviors and reflective practice. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2006;26(2):120-127. [doi: 10.1002/chp.60] [Medline: 16802313]
50. Anderson JG, Rainey MR, Eysenbach G. The impact of CyberHealthcare on the physician-patient relationship. J Med Syst 2003 Feb;27(1):67-84. [Medline: 12617199]
51. Shih HP. Extended technology acceptance model of Internet utilization behavior. Information & Management 2004 Jul;41(6):719-729. [doi: 10.1016/j.im.2003.08.009]
52. Cacioppo JT, Petty RE. The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1982 Jan;42(1):116-131 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116]
53. Petty RE, Bri?ol P, Loersch C, McCaslin MJ. The need for cognition. In: Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior. New York: Guilford; 2009:318-329.
54. Goonawardene N, Jiang J, Tan SSL, Jiang Z(. Pacific Asia Conf Inf Syst. 2013. Online Health Information Seeking and Adolescents' Intention Towards Health Self-Management URL: http://www.pacis-net.org/file/2013/PACIS2013-174.pdf [accessed 2015-06-12] [WebCite Cache ID 6ZPbW2KZF]
55. Simon D, Kriston L, Loh A, Spies C, Scheibler F, Wills C, et al. Confirmatory factor analysis and recommendations for improvement of the Autonomy-Preference-Index (API). Health Expect 2010 Sep;13(3):234-243. [doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00584.x] [Medline: 20579122]
56. Wilson EV, Lankton NK. Modeling patients' acceptance of provider-delivered e-health. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004;11(4):241-248 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1197/jamia.M1475] [Medline: 15064290]
57. Cho J, Park D, Lee HE. Cognitive factors of using health apps: systematic analysis of relationships among health consciousness, health information orientation, eHealth literacy, and health app use efficacy. J Med Internet Res 2014;16(5):e125 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.3283] [Medline: 24824062]
58. Dutta-Bergman MJ. Primary sources of health information: comparisons in the domain of health attitudes, health cognitions, and health behaviors. Health Commun 2004;16(3):273-288. [doi: 10.1207/S15327027HC1603-1] [Medline: 15265751]
59. Basu A, Dutta MJ. The relationship between health information seeking and community participation: the roles of health information orientation and efficacy. Health Commun 2008 ;23(1):70-79. [doi: 10.1080/10410230701807121] [Medline: 18443994]
60. Dutta-Bergman MJ. Trusted online sources of health information: differences in demographics, health beliefs, and health-information orientation. J Med Internet Res 2003;5(3):e21 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.5.3.e21] [Medline: 14517112]
61. Jayanti RK, Burns AC. The antecedents of preventive health care behavior: an empirical study. J Acad Mark Sci 1998;26(1):6-15. [doi: 10.1177/0092070398261002]
62. Mathieson K. Predicting user intentions: comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior. Information Systems Research 1991 Sep;2(3):173-191. [doi: 10.1287/isre.2.3.173]
63. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterley 1989;13(3):319-340.
64. Venkatesh V, Morris MG. Why don't men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly 2000 Mar;24(1):115-139. [doi: 10.2307/3250981]
65. Pai FY, Huang KI. Applying the Technology Acceptance Model to the introduction of healthcare information systems. Technol Forecast Soc Change 2011 May;78(4):650-660. [doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2010.11.007]
66. Taylor S, Todd P. Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models. Information Systems Research 1995 Jun;6(2):144-176. [doi: 10.1287/isre.6.2.144]
67. Taylor S, Todd P. Assessing IT usage: the role of prior experience. MIS Quarterly 1995 Dec;19(4):561-570. [doi: 10.2307/249633]
68. Statistisches B. Wirtschaftsrechnungen. Private Haushalte in der Informationsgesellschaft - Nutzung von Informationsund Kommunikationstechnologien. 2012. URL: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/Thematisch/EinkommenKonsumLebensbedingungen/PrivateHaushalte/PrivateHaushalteIKT2150400127004.pdf?-blob=publicationFile [accessed 2014-03-28] [WebCite Cache ID 6OPPC4HiD]
69. Fritz CO, Morris PE, Richler JJ. Effect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation. J Exp Psychol Gen 2012 Feb;141(1):2-18 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1037/a0024338] [Medline: 21823805]
70. Hedges LV. Distribution theory for Glass's estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 1981 Jan 01;6(2):107-128. [doi: 10.3102/10769986006002107]
71. Hedges LV. Estimation of effect size from a series of independent experiments. Psychological Bulletin 1982 Sep;92(2):490-499. [doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.92.2.490]
72. Hedges LV. Issues in meta-analysis. Rev Res Educ 1986;13:353-398.
73. Rosnow RL, Rosenthal R. Effect Sizes. Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology 2009 Feb 3;217(1):6-14. [doi: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.1.6]
74. Fröhlich M, Emrich E, Pieter A, Stark R. Outcome effects and effects sizes in sport sciences. Int J Sports Science and Engineering 2009;3(3):175-179 [FREE Full text] [WebCite Cache]
75. McCartney K, Rosenthal R. Effect size, practical importance, and social policy for children. Child Dev 2000 Feb 01;71(1):173-180.
76. Distefano C, Zhu M, M?ndrila D. Understanding and using factor scores: considerations for the applied researcher. Pract Assessment, Res Eval 2009;14(20):1-11 [FREE Full text] [WebCite Cache]
77. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1977.
78. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd edition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
79. Bortz J, Döring N. Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation: für Human-und Sozialwissenschaftler [Research Methods and Evaluation: for Human- and Social Scientists]. Berlin: Springer; 2006.
80. Fröhlich M, Pieter A. Cohen's Effektstärken als Mass der Bewertung von praktischer Relevanz - Implikationen für die Praxis [Cohen's effect sizes as measure for practical relevance - implications for practice]. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Sportmedizin und Sporttraumatologie 2006;57(4):139-142.
81. van Eimeren B, Frees B. Media Perspektiven. 2013. Rasanter Anstieg des Internetkonsums - Onliner fast drei Stunden täglich im Netz URL: http://www.media-perspektiven.de/uploads/tx-mppublications/0708-2013-Eimeren-Frees-01.pdf [accessed 2013-11-21] [WebCite Cache ID 6LHZaWeHA]
82. TNS Emnid. DigitalBarometer 1/2012: Mobiles Internet. 2012 Jun. URL: http://www.tns-emnid.com/presse/pdf/presseinformationen/DigitalBarometer2012-TNS-Emnid.pdf [accessed 2013-11-21] [WebCite Cache ID 6LHZWmmMn]
83. Or CKL, Karsh BT. A systematic review of patient acceptance of consumer health information technology. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2009 ;16(4):550-560 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1197/jamia.M2888] [Medline: 19390112]
84. Wajcman J. Feminist theories of technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics 2009 Jan 08;34(1):143-152. [doi: 10.1093/cje/ben057]
85. Young R. The household context for women's health care decisions: Impacts of UK policy changes. Social Science & Medicine 1996 Mar;42(6):949-963. [doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(95)00192-1] [Medline: 8779006]
86. Yoo EY, Robbins LS. Understanding middle-aged women's health information seeking on the web: A theoretical approach. J Am Soc Inf Sci 2008 Feb 15;59(4):577-590. [doi: 10.1002/asi.20766]
87. Menniti-Ippolito F, Gargiulo L, Bologna E, Forcella E, Raschetti R. Use of unconventional medicine in Italy: a nation-wide survey. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2002 Apr;58(1):61-64. [doi: 10.1007/s00228-002-0435-8] [Medline: 11956675]
88. Wilkinson JM, Jelinek H. Complementary medicine use among attendees at a rural health screening clinic. Complement Ther Clin Pract 2009 May;15(2):80-84. [doi: 10.1016/j.ctcp.2008.12.005] [Medline: 19341985]
89. Terlutter R, Capella ML. The gamification of advertising: analysis and research directions of in-game advertising, advergames, and advertising in social network games. Journal of Advertising 2013 Apr 03;42(2-3):95-112. [doi: 10.1080/00913367.2013.774610]