Women's information preferences, information needs and online interactive information portal engagement in a breast cancer early diagnosis context

References

• Techopedia.com [Internet]. Janalta Interactive Inc.; [Cited 2016 November 19]. Available from: https://www.techopedia.com/definition/424/social-software
   Google Scholar
• Suggs SL. A 10-year retrospective of research in new technologies for health communication. J Health Commun. 2006;11(1):61–74. doi: 10.1080/10810730500461083
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casell MM, Jackson C, Cheuvront B. Health communication on the internet: an effective channel for health behavior change? J Health Commun. 1998;3(1):71–79. doi: 10.1080/108107398127517
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keijser, WA. Online gezondheidsinformatie en lotgenotencontact. [Online health information and fellow sufferers contact]. eHealth Series Part I. 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Eysenbach G. What is e-health? J Med Internet Res. 2001;3(2):e20. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3.2.e20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunt D, Koteyko N, Gunter B. UK policy on social networking sites and online health: from informed patient to informed consumer? Digital Health. 2015;1. doi:10.1177/2055207615592513.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boote J, Telford R, Cooper C. Consumer involvement in health research: a review and research agenda. Health Policy. 2002;61(2):213–236. doi: 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00214-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boote J, Wong R, Booth A. ‘Talking the talk or walking the walk?’ A bibliometric review of the literature on public involvement in health research published between 1995 and 2009. Health Expect. 2015;18(1):44–57. doi: 10.1111/hex.12007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesse BW, O’Connell M, Augustson EM, et al. Realizing the promise of Web 2.0: engaging community intelligence. J Health Commun. 2011;16(sup1):10–31. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2011.589882
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim E, Han JY, Shah D, et al. Predictors of supportive message expression and reception in an interactive cancer communication system. J Health Commun. 2011;16(10):1106–1121. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2011.571337
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim JN, Lee S. Communication and cybercoping: coping with chronic illness through communicative action in online support networks. J Health Commun. 2014;19(7):775–794. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2013.864724
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Post DM, Shapiro CL, Donald JC, et al. Improving symptom communication through personal digital assistants: the CHAT (Communicating Health Assisted by Technology) project. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2013;47:153–161. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgt027
   Google Scholar
• Han JY, Hawkins RP, Shaw BR, et al. Unraveling uses and effects of an interactive health communication system. J Broadcast Electron. 2009;53(1):112–133. doi: 10.1080/08838150802643787
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han JY, Wise M, Kim F, et al. Factors associated with use of interactive cancer communication system: an application of the comprehensive model of information seeking. J Comput-Mediat Comm. 2010;15(3):367–388. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2010.01508.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustafson DH, Hawkins R, McTavish F, et al. Internet-based interactive support for cancer patients: are integrated systems better? J Commun. 2008;58(2):238–257. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00383.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw BR, Dubenske LL, Han JY, et al. Antecedent characteristics of online cancer information seeking among rural breast cancer patients: an application of the Cognitive-Social Health Information Processing (C-SHIP) model. J Health Commun. 2008;13:389–408. doi: 10.1080/10810730802063546
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw BR, Han JY, Baker T, et al. How women with breast cancer learn using interactive cancer communication systems. Health Educ Res. 2006;22(1):108–119. doi: 10.1093/her/cyl051
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Namkoong K, DuBenske LL, Shaw BR, et al. Creating a bond between caregivers online: effect on caregivers’ coping strategies. J Health Commun. 2012;17(2):125–140. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2011.585687
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Namkoong K, McLaughlin B, Yoo W, et al. The effects of expression: how providing emotional support online improves cancer patients’ coping strategies. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2013;47:169–174. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgt033
   Google Scholar
• Maloney-Krichmar D, Preece J. A multilevel analysis of sociability, usability, and community dynamics in an online health community. ACM T Comput-Hum Int. 2005;12(2):201–232.
   Google Scholar
• Archambault PM, van de Belt TH, Grajales FJ, et al. Wikis and collaborative writing applications in healthcare: a scoping review protocol. J Med Internet Res. 2012;1(1):1–13. doi: 10.2196/ijmr.2010
   Google Scholar
• Eysenbach G, Powell J, Englesakis M, et al. Health related virtual communities and electronic support groups: systematic review of the effects of online peer to peer interactions. BMJ. 2004;328:1166–1170. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7449.1166
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghazali, A, Tretiakov, A, Hunter, I. Knowledge construction in online health community support groups. 20th Australasian Conference on Information Systems. 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Xie B. Older adults’ health information wants in the internet age: implications for patient–provider relationships. Journal of Health Communication. 2009;14:510–524. doi: 10.1080/10810730903089614
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin CA, Neafsey PJ, Strickler Z. Usability testing by older adults of a computer-mediated health communication program. J Health Commun. 2009;14(2):102–118. doi: 10.1080/10810730802659095
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koch-Weser S, Bradshaw YS, Gualtieri L, et al. The internet as a health information source: findings from the 2007 Health Information National Trends Survey and implications for health communication. J Health Commun. 2010;15(sup3):279–293. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2010.522700
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy B, Funk C. Internet Science and Technology Public interest in science and health linked to gender, age and personality [Internet]. Washington (DC): PEW Research Center; [cited 2016 January 24]. Available from: http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/11/public-interest-in-science-and-health-linked-to-gender-age-and-personality/
   Google Scholar
• Kammerer Y, Gerjets P. Effect of search interface and internet-specific epistemic beliefs on source evaluations during web search for medical information: an eye-tracking study. Behav Inform Technol. 2012;31(1):83–97. doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2011.599040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eysenbach G, Köhler C. How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ. 2002;324(9):573–577. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7337.573
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Itinera Institute [Internet]. De toekomst van de gezondheidszorg. [The future of health care]. Brussels: Itinera Institute; [cited 2016 April 4]. Available from: www.itinerainstititute.com
   Google Scholar
• Eheman CR, Berkowitz Z, Lee J, et al. Information-seeking styles among cancer patients before and after treatment by demographics and use of information sources. J Health Commun. 2009;14(5):487–502. doi: 10.1080/10810730903032945
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly KM, Sturm AC, Kemp K, et al. How can we reach them? Information seeking and preferences for a cancer family history campaign in underserved communities. J Health Commun. 2009;14:573–589. doi: 10.1080/10810730903089580
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Keefe DJ, Jensen JD. The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease detection behaviors: a meta-analytic review. J Commun. 2009;59:296–316. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01417.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keer M, van den Putte B, de Wit J, et al. The effects of integrating instrumental and affective arguments in rhetorical and testimonial health messages. J Health Commun. 2013;18(9):1148–1161. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2013.768730
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zajac IT, Whibley AH, Cole SR, et al. Endorsement by the primary care practitioner consistently improves participation in screening for colorectal cancer: a longitudinal analysis. J Med Screen. 2010;17(1):19–24. doi: 10.1258/jms.2010.009101
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesse BW, Cole GE, Powe BD. Partnering against cancer today: a blueprint for coordinating efforts through communication science. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2013;47:233–239. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgt024
   Google Scholar
• Powell J, Inglis N, Ronnie J, et al. The characteristics and motivations of online health information seekers: cross-sectional survey and qualitative interview study. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(1):e20. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1600
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tustin N. The role of patient satisfaction in online health information seeking. J Health Commun. 2010;15(1):3–17. doi: 10.1080/10810730903465491
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho J, Noh HI, Ha MH, et al. What kind of cancer information do internet users need? Support Care Cancer. 2011;19(9):1465–1469. doi: 10.1007/s00520-010-1057-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rieh SY, Danielson DR. Credibility: a multidisciplinary framework. Annu Rev Inform Sci. 2007;41:307–364. doi: 10.1002/aris.2007.1440410114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu WY, Linn CT, Fu CS, et al. The role of endorsers, framing, and rewards on the effectiveness of dietary supplement advertisements. J Health Commun. 2012;17(1):54–75. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2011.585689
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong NCH, Harvell LA, Harrison KJ. The unintended target: assessing nonsmokers’ reactions to gain- and loss-framed antismoking public service announcements. J Health Commun. 2013;18(12):1402–1421. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2013.798376
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters E, Lipkus I, Diefenbach MA. The functions of affect in health communications and in the construction of health preferences. J Commun. 2006;56(s1):140–162. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00287.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray JB, Harrington NG. Narrative and framing: a test of an integrated message strategy in the exercise context. J Health Commun. 2011;16:264–281. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2010.529490
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Hal G, Moens S, Van Goethem M, et al. Is the health promotion campaign for the breast cancer screening programme in Flanders successful? A process evaluation. Arch Public Health. 2004;62(5):209–225.
   Google Scholar
• Damery S, Smith S, Clements A, et al. Evaluating the effectiveness of GP endorsement on increasing participation in the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2012;13(1):195. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-13-18
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hewitson P, Ward AM, Heneghan C, et al. Primary care endorsement letter and a patient leaflet to improve participation in colorectal cancer screening: results of a factorial randomised trial. Brit J Cancer. 2011;105:475–480. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2011.255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freed GL, Clark SJ, Butchart AT, et al. Sources and perceived credibility of vaccine-safety information for parents. Peditriatics. 2011;127(1):S107–S112. doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-1722P
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ancker JS, Carpenter KM, Greene P, et al. Peer-to-peer communication, cancer prevention, and the internet. J Health Commun. 2009;14(S1):38–46. doi: 10.1080/10810730902806760
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kellen E, Martens P. Kan de huisarts de screeningsgraad verhogen? [Can the general practitioner increase the screening participation rate?]. Huisarts Nu. 2016;45(4):170–173. doi: 10.1007/s40954-016-0065-5
   Google Scholar