title: A framework for characterizing eHealth literacy demands and barriers.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Consumer eHealth interventions are of a growing importance in the individual management of health and health behaviors. However, a range of access, resources, and skills barriers prevent health care consumers from fully engaging in and benefiting from the spectrum of eHealth interventions. Consumers may engage in a range of eHealth tasks, such as participating in health discussion forums and entering information into a personal health record. eHealth literacy names a set of skills and knowledge that are essential for productive interactions with technology-based health tools, such as proficiency in information retrieval strategies, and communicating health concepts effectively.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  We propose a theoretical and methodological framework for characterizing complexity of eHealth tasks, which can be used to diagnose and describe literacy barriers and inform the development of solution strategies.
  
  
  METHODS
  We adapted and integrated two existing theoretical models relevant to the analysis of eHealth literacy into a single framework to systematically categorize and describe task demands and user performance on tasks needed by health care consumers in the information age. The method derived from the framework is applied to (1) code task demands using a cognitive task analysis, and (2) code user performance on tasks. The framework and method are applied to the analysis of a Web-based consumer eHealth task with information-seeking and decision-making demands. We present the results from the in-depth analysis of the task performance of a single user as well as of 20 users on the same task to illustrate both the detailed analysis and the aggregate measures obtained and potential analyses that can be performed using this method.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The analysis shows that the framework can be used to classify task demands as well as the barriers encountered in user performance of the tasks. Our approach can be used to (1) characterize the challenges confronted by participants in performing the tasks, (2) determine the extent to which application of the framework to the cognitive task analysis can predict and explain the problems encountered by participants, and (3) inform revisions to the framework to increase accuracy of predictions.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The results of this illustrative application suggest that the framework is useful for characterizing task complexity and for diagnosing and explaining barriers encountered in task completion. The framework and analytic approach can be a potentially powerful generative research platform to inform development of rigorous eHealth examination and design instruments, such as to assess eHealth competence, to design and evaluate consumer eHealth tools, and to develop an eHealth curriculum.
authors.affiliation: Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
authors.forename: Connie V
authors.initials: CV
authors.lastname: Chan
authors.forename: David R
authors.initials: DR
authors.lastname: Kaufman
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D003071:Cognition; D003197:Computer Literacy; D005260:Female; D057220:Health Literacy; D006801:Humans; D020407:Internet; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D013647:Task Performance and Analysis; D017216:Telemedicine; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: Int J Med Inform. 2004 Feb;73(1):45-55
references.pmid: 15036078
references.citation: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008 Jan-Feb;15(1):8-13
references.pmid: 17947617
references.citation: J Med Internet Res. 2001 Apr-Jun;3(2):E20
references.pmid: 11720962
references.citation: Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2008 Nov;(175):1-1422
references.pmid: 19408968
references.citation: J Biomed Inform. 2003 Feb-Apr;36(1-2):45-60
references.pmid: 14552846
references.citation: JAMA. 2004 May 19;291(19):2359-66
references.pmid: 15150208
references.citation: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001 Jul-Aug;8(4):324-43
references.pmid: 11418539
references.citation: AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2009 Nov 14;2009:86-90
references.pmid: 20351828
references.citation: J Med Internet Res. 2006 Jun 16;8(2):e9
references.pmid: 16867972
references.citation: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007 Nov-Dec;14(6):713-21
references.pmid: 17712082
references.citation: AORN J. 2008 Sep;88(3):390-402
references.pmid: 18790101
references.citation: J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2004 May-Jun;19(3):209-14; quiz 215-6
references.pmid: 15191264
references.citation: Hum Factors. 1990 Oct;32(5):537-49
references.pmid: 2074108
references.citation: J Med Internet Res. 2009 Oct 27;11(4):e44
references.pmid: 19861298
references.citation: Med Decis Making. 2010 Jan-Feb;30(1):35-44
references.pmid: 19692709
references.citation: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005 Mar-Apr;12(2):152-63
references.pmid: 15561782
references.citation: BMJ. 2006 Dec 23;333(7582):1283-4
references.pmid: 17185707
references.citation: JAMA. 1998 Oct 21;280(15):1371-5
references.pmid: 9794322
references.citation: Am J Kidney Dis. 2004 Jul;44(1):71-6
references.pmid: 15211440
references.citation: Health Promot Int. 2005 Jun;20(2):195-203
references.pmid: 15788526
references.citation: Am J Prev Med. 2007 May;32(5 Suppl):S131-3
references.pmid: 17466818
references.citation: JAMA. 2002 May 22-29;287(20):2691-700
references.pmid: 12020305
references.citation: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009 Sep-Oct;16(5):660-9
references.pmid: 19567793
references.citation: J Med Internet Res. 2007 Dec 13;9(4):e35
references.pmid: 18093903
references.citation: Health Info Libr J. 2007 Mar;24(1):2-23
references.pmid: 17331140