eHealth LiteracyNCT07886645
The Effects of a Scenario-based Fact-checking Course on eHealth Literacy and Fact-checking Skills Among Older Adults.
A study testing Scenario-Based Fact-Checking Course and Nutrition Education in people with eHealth Literacy and Digital Health Literacy, run by National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University.
Trial summary
As more older adults use the internet to seek health information, it may be difficult to determine whether online information is trustworthy. Social media posts, advertisements, messages, and product promotions may contain misleading information or scams. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 65 to 100 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- eHealth Literacy, Digital Health Literacy, Fact Checking
- What is being tested?
- Scenario-Based Fact-Checking Course and Nutrition Education
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Sep 2026to Jun 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 65 to 100 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adults aged 65 years or older.
- Able to read and communicate in Chinese at a basic level.
- Correctly answer all five items of the JOMAC rapid cognitive function screening assessment.
- Own a personal electronic device, such as a smartphone, tablet, or computer.
- Willing to participate in the digital health information course.
Who cannot join
- Have a physician-diagnosed cognitive impairment or dementia, including individuals with a catastrophic illness certificate for dementia, a diagnostic certificate for dementia or cognitive impairment, or a disability certificate related to cognitive impairment or dementia.
- Participate in another information-education-related course during the study period.
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
About this study
As more older adults use the internet to seek health information, it may be difficult to determine whether online information is trustworthy. Social media posts, advertisements, messages, and product promotions may contain misleading information or scams. This study will examine whether a practical fact-checking course can help older adults make more accurate judgments about online health information.
Approximately 100 older adults from senior learning centers in northern Taiwan will participate in this study. Participants will be assigned to one of two groups. The experimental group will receive a four-week health information fact-checking course, and the control group will receive a four-week nutrition education course. Both groups will participate in learning activities; however, only the fact-checking course will involve digital tools and examples of online health information.
Read more
Participants in the fact-checking course will practice evaluating health information through common real-life situations, including health-related social media posts, online product advertisements, free-gift promotions, and suspicious text messages. The course will teach a fact-checking method called SIFT:
Stop: Pause before believing or sharing information. Investigate the source: Check who created or posted the information. Find better coverage: Look for other reliable sources that discuss the same claim.
Trace claims to the original context: Locate the original source and determine whether the claim has been presented accurately.
Before and after the four-week intervention, participants will complete questionnaires and short activities concerning the use of online health information and the evaluation of health-related messages. The investigators will compare outcomes between the two groups to determine whether the fact-checking course improves confidence and accuracy in judging online health information.
This study may inform the development of digital health learning programs for older adults.
Read the detailed description
Background and Rationale Taiwan has entered a super-aged society, and older adults increasingly use the internet to obtain health information. At the same time, older adults may face digital divides, misinformation, and health fraud risks. Existing digital learning programs for older adults often emphasize device operation and creative digital products, with relatively limited attention to evaluating information sources and verifying claims. As a result, available programs may not adequately address practical needs related to judging the trustworthiness of online health information.
Purpose This study aims to develop and evaluate a scenario-based fact-checking course focused on online health information. The intervention will integrate theoretical instruction and practical learning activities. Its effectiveness will be evaluated using the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS), the Digital Health Literacy Instrument (DHLI), SIFT strategy implementation, and health information judgment accuracy within a quasi-experimental design.
Methods This quasi-experimental study will recruit approximately 100 older adults from six senior learning centers in northern Taiwan. Participants will be assigned to either an experimental group or a control group. Both groups will complete baseline and post-intervention assessments, including a demographic questionnaire, the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS), the Digital Health Literacy Instrument (DHLI), and a health information judgment test.
During the four-week intervention, participants in the experimental group will receive a scenario-based health information fact-checking course. The course will teach the SIFT strategy: Stop, Investigate the source, Find better coverage, and Trace claims to the original context. Participants will complete worksheets documenting SIFT strategy implementation and the accuracy of health information judgments.
The course will incorporate four authentic or simulated health information scenarios commonly encountered by older adults: medical posts claiming endorsement by authorities, health product advertisements promoted through influencer live streams, suspicious free-gift promotions, and potentially fraudulent subsidy text messages assessed through website URL examination. These scenarios are designed to support hands-on practice in lateral reading, source evaluation, and fact-checking.
Participants in the control group will receive a four-week nutrition education program without digital technologies, online health information evaluation, or digital learning materials. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) will be used to examine between-group differences in post-intervention eHealth literacy, digital health literacy, and health information judgment outcomes while controlling for baseline measures.
Expected Results After controlling for baseline differences and participant characteristics, the experimental group is expected to demonstrate higher overall eHEALS scores, DHLI domain scores, and health information judgment accuracy than the control group. SIFT strategy implementation is also expected to increase progressively during the four-week intervention, indicating that older adults can apply fact-checking strategies in authentic online health information contexts.
- Conditions
- eHealth Literacy, Digital Health Literacy, Fact Checking
- Being tested
- Scenario-Based Fact-Checking Course, Nutrition Education
- Keywords
- scenario based instruction, eHealth literacy, digital health literacy, fact checking, older Adults
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Scenario-Based Fact-Checking CourseBehavioural
This four-week behavioral education intervention is a scenario-based fact-checking course designed to improve older adults' ability to evaluate online health information. The course teaches the SIFT strategy: Stop, Investigate the source, Find better coverage, and Trace claims to the original context. Participants will use digital devices and structured worksheets to practice checking the credibility and accuracy of health-related information. Learning activities are based on four common online scenarios: health-related social media posts claiming endorsement by authorities, influencer-promoted health product advertisements, suspicious free-gift promotions, and potentially fraudulent subsidy text messages. The course emphasizes lateral reading, source evaluation, and verification of health claims through hands-on practice.
Nutrition EducationBehavioural
This four-week behavioral nutrition education program is designed as an active comparison intervention. Participants will receive general education on healthy eating and nutrition for older adults, including balanced food choices, dietary habits, and basic nutrition principles. The program will be delivered without digital devices, online health information evaluation, or fact-checking instruction. Its duration and session schedule will be comparable to those of the experimental group.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Scenario-Based Fact-Checking Course | Experimental | Participants will receive a four-week scenario-based health information fact-checking course. Receives: Behavioral: Scenario-Based Fact-Checking Course |
| Nutrition Education | Active comparator | Participants will receive a four-week nutrition education program. Receives: Behavioral: Nutrition Education |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
eHealth Literacy
eHealth literacy will be assessed using the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS), an 8-item self-report questionnaire that measures perceived ability to locate, understand, evaluate, and use online health information. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Item scores will be summed to produce a total score ranging from 8 to 40. Higher scores indicate higher perceived eHealth literacy. The outcome will be assessed at baseline and immediately after the four-week intervention.
Measured: Baseline and immediately after the 4-week intervention
Digital Health Literacy (DHLI)
Digital health literacy(DHLI) will be assessed using the 30-item Chinese version of the Digital Health Literacy Instrument. The instrument includes 23 self-report items and 7 objective performance-based items. Self-report items assess perceived digital health literacy using a 4-point Likert scale. Task-difficulty items range from 1, very easy, to 4, very difficult; frequency-of-difficulty items range from 1, never, to 4, often. Self-report items will be reverse-coded. Total self-report scores range from 23 to 92, with higher scores indicating better perceived digital health literacy. Objective items are scored as correct (1) or incorrect (0), with total scores ranging from 0 to 7; higher scores indicate better performance. Assessments will occur at baseline and immediately after the 4-week intervention.
Measured: Baseline and immediately after the 4-week intervention
Health Information Judgment Accuracy
Health information judgment accuracy will be assessed using the Researcher Developed Scenario Based Health Information Judgment Test. The test includes four health information scenarios at baseline and four comparable scenarios after the intervention. Each scenario is scored as correct (1) or incorrect (0). Total scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating greater accuracy in judging the credibility or accuracy of online health information. The outcome will be assessed at baseline and immediately after the four-week intervention.
Measured: Baseline and immediately after the 4-week intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Oct 2026
- Study startSep 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completionDec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completionJun 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for eHealth LiteracyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This is a two-arm, parallel-group, quasi-experimental study. Approximately 100 older adults will be recruited from six senior learning centers in northern Taiwan and assigned to an experimental group or a control group. Both groups will complete baseline and post-intervention assessments. The experimental group will receive a four-week scenario-based online health information fact-checking course using the SIFT strategy. The control group will receive a four-week nutrition education program without digital technology or digital learning materials.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07886645
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NYCU115209AE
- Status last verified
- Aug 2026
- First submitted
- 21 Aug 2026
- Last updated
- 21 Oct 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Data access will be limited to authorized members of the research team, including the principal investigator, for research oversight, data management, and analysis in accordance with the approved ethical protocol and informed consent procedures.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Oct 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Effects of a Scenario-based Fact-checking Course on eHealth Literacy and Fact-checking Skills Among Older Adults.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07886645
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- NYCU115209AE
- Conditions
- eHealth Literacy, Digital Health Literacy, Fact Checking
- Keywords
- scenario based instruction, eHealth literacy, digital health literacy, fact checking, older Adults
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- National Yang Ming Chiao Tung UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Sep 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Jun 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 21 Oct 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
As more older adults use the internet to seek health information, it may be difficult to determine whether online information is trustworthy. Social media posts, advertisements, messages, and product promotions may contain misleading information or scams. This study will examine whether a practical fact-checking course can help older adults make more accurate judgments about online health information.
Approximately 100 older adults from senior learning centers in northern Taiwan will participate in this study. Participants will be assigned to one of two groups. The experimental group will receive a four-week health information fact-checking course, and the control group will receive a four-week nutrition education course. Both groups will participate in learning activities; however, only the fact-checking course will involve digital tools and examples of online health information.
Participants in the fact-checking course will practice evaluating health information through common real-life situations, including health-related social media posts, online product advertisements, free-gift promotions, and suspicious text messages. The course will teach a fact-checking method called SIFT:
Stop: Pause before believing or sharing information. Investigate the source: Check who created or posted the information. Find better coverage: Look for other reliable sources that discuss the same claim.
Trace claims to the original context: Locate the original source and determine whether the claim has been presented accurately.
Before and after the four-week intervention, participants will complete questionnaires and short activities concerning the use of online health information and the evaluation of health-related messages. The investigators will compare outcomes between the two groups to determine whether the fact-checking course improves confidence and accuracy in judging online health information.
This study may inform the development of digital health learning programs for older adults.
Detailed description
Background and Rationale Taiwan has entered a super-aged society, and older adults increasingly use the internet to obtain health information. At the same time, older adults may face digital divides, misinformation, and health fraud risks. Existing digital learning programs for older adults often emphasize device operation and creative digital products, with relatively limited attention to evaluating information sources and verifying claims. As a result, available programs may not adequately address practical needs related to judging the trustworthiness of online health information.
Purpose This study aims to develop and evaluate a scenario-based fact-checking course focused on online health information. The intervention will integrate theoretical instruction and practical learning activities. Its effectiveness will be evaluated using the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS), the Digital Health Literacy Instrument (DHLI), SIFT strategy implementation, and health information judgment accuracy within a quasi-experimental design.
Methods This quasi-experimental study will recruit approximately 100 older adults from six senior learning centers in northern Taiwan. Participants will be assigned to either an experimental group or a control group. Both groups will complete baseline and post-intervention assessments, including a demographic questionnaire, the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS), the Digital Health Literacy Instrument (DHLI), and a health information judgment test.
During the four-week intervention, participants in the experimental group will receive a scenario-based health information fact-checking course. The course will teach the SIFT strategy: Stop, Investigate the source, Find better coverage, and Trace claims to the original context. Participants will complete worksheets documenting SIFT strategy implementation and the accuracy of health information judgments.
The course will incorporate four authentic or simulated health information scenarios commonly encountered by older adults: medical posts claiming endorsement by authorities, health product advertisements promoted through influencer live streams, suspicious free-gift promotions, and potentially fraudulent subsidy text messages assessed through website URL examination. These scenarios are designed to support hands-on practice in lateral reading, source evaluation, and fact-checking.
Participants in the control group will receive a four-week nutrition education program without digital technologies, online health information evaluation, or digital learning materials. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) will be used to examine between-group differences in post-intervention eHealth literacy, digital health literacy, and health information judgment outcomes while controlling for baseline measures.
Expected Results After controlling for baseline differences and participant characteristics, the experimental group is expected to demonstrate higher overall eHEALS scores, DHLI domain scores, and health information judgment accuracy than the control group. SIFT strategy implementation is also expected to increase progressively during the four-week intervention, indicating that older adults can apply fact-checking strategies in authentic online health information contexts.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This is a two-arm, parallel-group, quasi-experimental study. Approximately 100 older adults will be recruited from six senior learning centers in northern Taiwan and assigned to an experimental group or a control group. Both groups will complete baseline and post-intervention assessments. The experimental group will receive a four-week scenario-based online health information fact-checking course using the SIFT strategy. The control group will receive a four-week nutrition education program without digital technology or digital learning materials.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Scenario-Based Fact-Checking Course | Experimental | Behavioral: Scenario-Based Fact-Checking CourseParticipants will receive a four-week scenario-based health information fact-checking course. |
| Nutrition Education | Active comparator | Behavioral: Nutrition EducationParticipants will receive a four-week nutrition education program. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 65 to 100 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Adults aged 65 years or older.
- Able to read and communicate in Chinese at a basic level.
- Correctly answer all five items of the JOMAC rapid cognitive function screening assessment.
- Own a personal electronic device, such as a smartphone, tablet, or computer.
- Willing to participate in the digital health information course.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Have a physician-diagnosed cognitive impairment or dementia, including individuals with a catastrophic illness certificate for dementia, a diagnostic certificate for dementia or cognitive impairment, or a disability certificate related to cognitive impairment or dementia.
- Participate in another information-education-related course during the study period.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Scenario-Based Fact-Checking CourseThis four-week behavioral education intervention is a scenario-based fact-checking course designed to improve older adults' ability to evaluate online health information. The course teaches the SIFT strategy: Stop, Investigate the source, Find better coverage, and Trace claims to the original context. Participants will use digital devices and structured worksheets to practice checking the credibility and accuracy of health-related information. Learning activities are based on four common online scenarios: health-related social media posts claiming endorsement by authorities, influencer-promoted health product advertisements, suspicious free-gift promotions, and potentially fraudulent subsidy text messages. The course emphasizes lateral reading, source evaluation, and verification of health claims through hands-on practice. | Behavioural | Scenario-Based Fact-Checking Course |
| Nutrition EducationThis four-week behavioral nutrition education program is designed as an active comparison intervention. Participants will receive general education on healthy eating and nutrition for older adults, including balanced food choices, dietary habits, and basic nutrition principles. The program will be delivered without digital devices, online health information evaluation, or fact-checking instruction. Its duration and session schedule will be comparable to those of the experimental group. | Behavioural | Nutrition Education |
Primary outcome
eHealth Literacy
Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 4-week intervention
eHealth literacy will be assessed using the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS), an 8-item self-report questionnaire that measures perceived ability to locate, understand, evaluate, and use online health information. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Item scores will be summed to produce a total score ranging from 8 to 40. Higher scores indicate higher perceived eHealth literacy. The outcome will be assessed at baseline and immediately after the four-week intervention.
Digital Health Literacy (DHLI)
Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 4-week intervention
Digital health literacy(DHLI) will be assessed using the 30-item Chinese version of the Digital Health Literacy Instrument. The instrument includes 23 self-report items and 7 objective performance-based items. Self-report items assess perceived digital health literacy using a 4-point Likert scale. Task-difficulty items range from 1, very easy, to 4, very difficult; frequency-of-difficulty items range from 1, never, to 4, often. Self-report items will be reverse-coded. Total self-report scores range from 23 to 92, with higher scores indicating better perceived digital health literacy. Objective items are scored as correct (1) or incorrect (0), with total scores ranging from 0 to 7; higher scores indicate better performance. Assessments will occur at baseline and immediately after the 4-week intervention.
Health Information Judgment Accuracy
Time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 4-week intervention
Health information judgment accuracy will be assessed using the Researcher Developed Scenario Based Health Information Judgment Test. The test includes four health information scenarios at baseline and four comparable scenarios after the intervention. Each scenario is scored as correct (1) or incorrect (0). Total scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating greater accuracy in judging the credibility or accuracy of online health information. The outcome will be assessed at baseline and immediately after the four-week intervention.
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 Oct 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Data access will be limited to authorized members of the research team, including the principal investigator, for research oversight, data management, and analysis in accordance with the approved ethical protocol and informed consent procedures.
Related trials for eHealth Literacy
Active, not recruitingObservational study
E-Health Literacy Intervention for Bangladeshi Migrants With Type 2 Diabetes in Italy
Type 2 Diabetes, Diabete Mellitus
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Digital Health Literacy and Social Participation in Individuals With Hemiplegia
Stroke, Hemiplegia
Not yet recruiting
Smart Nursing AI Agent for Health Self-Management
Mobility Limitations, Community-dwelling Older Adults
Not yet recruiting
Motivational Interviewing for Overweight and Obese Adults at Healthy Life Centers
Overweight, Obesity
Recruiting
New Care Pathways for Supporting TRANSitional CARE From Hospital to Home Using AI and Personalized Digital Assistance
Transitional Care, Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Scenario-Based Fact-Checking Course and Nutrition Education in people with eHealth Literacy and Digital Health Literacy, run by National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 Oct 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact SHU-TING HSU, Bachelor's Degree (+886 937218092, shuting11204@gmail.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
eHealth Literacy (time frame: Baseline and immediately after the 4-week intervention). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 21 Oct 2026.