e.g. mhealth
Search Results (1 to 10 of 21 Results)
Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS
Skip search results from other journals and go to results- 9 Journal of Medical Internet Research
- 4 JMIR Formative Research
- 3 JMIR Infodemiology
- 2 JMIR Research Protocols
- 1 Interactive Journal of Medical Research
- 1 JMIR Medical Informatics
- 1 JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting
- 0 Medicine 2.0
- 0 iProceedings
- 0 JMIR Human Factors
- 0 JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
- 0 JMIR mHealth and uHealth
- 0 JMIR Serious Games
- 0 JMIR Mental Health
- 0 JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies
- 0 JMIR Preprints
- 0 JMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology
- 0 JMIR Medical Education
- 0 JMIR Cancer
- 0 JMIR Challenges
- 0 JMIR Diabetes
- 0 JMIR Biomedical Engineering
- 0 JMIR Data
- 0 JMIR Cardio
- 0 Journal of Participatory Medicine
- 0 JMIR Dermatology
- 0 JMIR Aging
- 0 JMIR Perioperative Medicine
- 0 JMIR Nursing
- 0 JMIRx Med
- 0 JMIRx Bio
- 0 Transfer Hub (manuscript eXchange)
- 0 JMIR AI
- 0 JMIR Neurotechnology
- 0 Asian/Pacific Island Nursing Journal
- 0 Online Journal of Public Health Informatics
- 0 JMIR XR and Spatial Computing (JMXR)
Future research could benefit from a more systematic analysis of how platform-level governance affects the credibility and visibility of online health communication.
Despite these findings, several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First and most importantly, our research team retrieved and analyzed only Chinese-language videos targeting Chinese audiences, using a limited set of search keywords.
JMIR Infodemiology 2025;5:e64891
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
The evaluation of the quality of encountered content often focuses on the credibility or trustworthiness of information, which is understood as perspectival to the user and not an innate feature of information. Yet, credibility is commonly thought to be influenced by cues that surround the presentation of information [20].
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e64901
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
The quality of medical-related information can be assessed according to 2 dimensions: (1) The credibility of sources, which refers to the degree of trustworthiness associated with the information and its origin [24-27]. This includes evaluations of accuracy, authority, objectivity, currency, and coverage [26,28].
JMIR Form Res 2025;9:e62754
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
It will try to add more consistent factors that can account for the credibility of LLMs. There is now a growing body of research on using LLMs for mental health care provision [8]. However, it is worth noting that there are very few to almost no studies on the credibility of LLMs, particularly in medicine [9,10] and mental health support. This review intends to address this gap.
JMIR Res Protoc 2025;14:e62865
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Subsequently, a team of experienced clinicians assessed the credibility of these sources, adhering to the principles of evidence-based medicine. This methodology enabled us to pinpoint crucial areas for enhancing interventions aimed at curbing the dissemination of noncredible online health information.
J Med Internet Res 2024;26:e48130
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
The overall aim of the Rec Map is to identify and collate all COVID-19 guidelines, assess the credibility and trustworthiness of the recommendations, and make the recommendations understandable to various stakeholder groups.
JMIR Form Res 2024;8:e53593
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Arabic Web-Based Information on Oral Lichen Planus: Content Analysis
The HON tool evaluates the reliability and credibility of health websites. HON asks reviewers to evaluate a given web page regarding eight sections: authority, complementarity, confidentiality, attribution, justifiability, transparency, financial disclosure, and advertising policy [30]. The reviewer will score each item from 0% (did not fulfill the specific item) to 100% (total fulfillment of that item), while the HON final score is an average of scores across the eight items.
JMIR Form Res 2024;8:e49198
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
The quality of information can be examined in 3 domains: accuracy, credibility, and readability [17].
Interact J Med Res 2024;13:e42849
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Characterizing Precision Nutrition Discourse on Twitter: Quantitative Content Analysis
Do information characteristics such as credibility, benefit framing, citation of sources, association with products, and community engagement metrics vary by topic?
Who is involved in these discussions—what types of expertise are evident among the communicators? Are these expertise types associated with variations in the information characteristics and topics?
How often do communications contain potentially misleading or false information?
J Med Internet Res 2023;25:e43701
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
credibilityQuality/Credibility of eHealth Information and Trust Issues
JMIR Pediatr Parent 2023;6:e41806
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS