MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2766432329 · doi:10.2196/publichealth.5393

Examining E-Loyalty in a Sexual Health Website: Cross-Sectional Study

2017· article· en· W2766432329 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Alexandra Nunn, Rik Crutzen, Devon Haag, Cathy Chabot, Anna Carson, Gina Ogilvie, Jean Shoveller, Mark Gilbert

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreBC Centre for Disease Control
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsCross-sectional studyEnvironmental healthPublic healthPsychologyMedicineInternet privacyComputer scienceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Web-based sexual health resources are typically evaluated in terms of their efficacy. Information is lacking about how sexual health promotion websites are perceived and used. It is essential to understand website use to address challenges with adherence and attrition to Web-based health interventions. An existing theoretical framework for examining loyalty to electronic health (eHealth) interventions has been not yet been applied in the context of sexual health promotion nor has the association between e-loyalty and intended intervention efficacy outcomes been investigated. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to investigate users' loyalty toward a sexual health website (ie, e-loyalty), measure user perceptions of the website, and measure the association between e-loyalty and perceived knowledge increase and intent to change behavior. METHODS: Over 4 months, website users (clients and health care providers) participated in an open, online, cross-sectional survey about their user experiences that measured e-loyalty, user perceptions, and intended website efficacy outcomes. Relationships between user perceptions and e-loyalty were investigated using structural equation modeling (SEM). Associations between e-loyalty and website efficacy outcomes were tested using Spearman rank correlation. RESULTS: A total of 173 participants completed user perception questions and were included in the analysis. E-loyalty was high for both clients and providers and was significantly correlated with clients' perceived knowledge increase (ρ(171)=.30, P<.001), their intent to have safer sex (ρ(171)=.24, P=.01), and their intent to get tested for sexually transmitted infections (ρ(171)=.37, P<.001). The SEM showed that trustworthiness, overall experience, active trust, and effectiveness were directly related to e-loyalty. Finding the website "easy to understand" was significantly related to active trust (ie, participants' willingness to act upon information presented on the website). CONCLUSIONS: E-loyalty may be related to the efficacy of the selected website in improving one's sexual health and was significantly associated with all three intended knowledge and behavioral outcomes. To increase e-loyalty, trustworthiness and active trust are important user perceptions to deliberately engender. Our findings indicate that understanding a website contributes to active trust, thereby highlighting the importance of considering eHealth literacy in designing health promotion websites. Our study confirms the relevance of e-loyalty as an outcome for evaluating the antecedents of the use and efficacy of online public health interventions across disciplines by adapting and validating an existing e-loyalty framework to the field of sexual health promotion. Our findings suggest that e-loyalty is positively associated with measures of website efficacy, including increased knowledge and intent to change behavior. Longitudinal research with larger samples could further investigate the relationships between e-loyalty, website understandability, and outcomes of online health interventions to determine how the manipulation of website characteristics may impact user perceptions and e-loyalty.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.169
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→