↓ Skip to main content

Odds of talking to healthcare providers as the initial source of healthcare information: updated cross-sectional results from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Family Practice, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
10 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Odds of talking to healthcare providers as the initial source of healthcare information: updated cross-sectional results from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS)
Published in
BMC Family Practice, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12875-018-0805-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine M. Swoboda, Joseph M. Van Hulle, Ann Scheck McAlearney, Timothy R. Huerta

Abstract

People use a variety of means to find health information, including searching the Internet, seeking print sources, and talking to healthcare providers, family members, and friends. Doctors are considered the most trusted source of health information, but people may be underutilizing them in favor of searching the Internet. A multinomial logistic regression of cross-sectional data from Cycle 4 of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) was conducted. Independent variables included gender, age, rurality, cancer history, general health, income, race, education level, insurance status, veteran status, Internet use, and data year; the dependent variable was the first chosen source of health information. The most frequent initial source of health information was the Internet, and the second most frequent was healthcare providers. There were significant differences in odds of using healthcare providers as the first source of health information. Those likely to use doctors as their initial source of health information were older adults, black adults, adults with health insurance, those who do not use the Internet, and adults who do not have a college degree. People who use healthcare providers as the first source of health information may have better access to health care and be those less likely to use the Internet. Doctors may have to provide more information to those who do not use the internet and spend time verifying information for those who do use health information from the internet.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 13%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Master 6 13%
Other 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 12 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 13%
Engineering 5 11%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Computer Science 3 6%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 15 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 December 2021.
All research outputs
#1,827,117
of 21,385,220 outputs
Outputs from BMC Family Practice
#189
of 1,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,651
of 296,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Family Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,385,220 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,841 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 296,374 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them