MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127233571 · doi:10.2196/15858

The Relationship Between Individual Coping and the Need to Have and Seek Health Information Among Older Adults: Exploratory Mixed Methods Study

2021· article· en· W3127233571 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sabine Theis, Katharina Schäfer, Dajana Schäfer, Nicole Jochems, Verena Nitsch

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoping (psychology)Information seekingExploratory researchPsychologyAvoidance copingQualitative researchInformation exchangeClinical psychologySocial psychologyApplied psychologyGerontologyMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The need to have and seek information shapes the context of computing systems. When it comes to health, individual coping influences human behavior. Therefore, the relationship between individual coping and the need to have and seek health information plays a crucial role in the development of digital health systems. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine the relationship between individual coping and the need to have and seek health information among older adults. METHODS: Questionnaires and semistructured interviews investigated the health information need (HIN) and health information-seeking behavior (HISB) in relation to the individual coping strategies of 26 older Germans. RESULTS: =-0.37895; bias-corrected and accelerated bootstrap 95% BCa CI -0.730 to 0.092; P=.05). The qualitative results supported this finding. For some participants, information and exchange was part of dealing with their health situation, whereas others wanted to learn as little as possible to avoid a decline in their health status. The older adults acquired, collected, and exchanged paper-based health data to augment clinical information sources and support information exchange with professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Individual coping strategies are relevant for the design of digital health systems. They can support older adults in coping with their health situation, although it remains unclear how systems must be designed for people with an avoidance coping strategy to achieve the same acceptance.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207