Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Formative Research

Date Submitted: May 6, 2023
Date Accepted: Mar 12, 2024

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Comparison of Self-Tracking Health Practices, eHealth Literacy, and Subjective Well-Being Between College Students With and Without Disabilities: Cross-Sectional Survey

Choi S

Comparison of Self-Tracking Health Practices, eHealth Literacy, and Subjective Well-Being Between College Students With and Without Disabilities: Cross-Sectional Survey

JMIR Form Res 2024;8:e48783

DOI: 10.2196/48783

PMID: 38598285

PMCID: 11043924

Comparison of Self-Tracking Health Practices, eHealth literacy, and Subjective Well-Being between College Students with and without Disabilities: Cross-Sectional Survey

  • Soyoung Choi

ABSTRACT

Background:

College students with disabilities need to transition from pediatric-centered care to adult care. However, they may become overwhelmed by multiple responsibilities, such as academic activities, peer relationships, career preparation, job seeking, independent living, as well as managing their health and promoting healthy behaviors.

Objective:

As the use of smartphones and wearable devices for collecting personal health data becomes popular, this study aims to compare the characteristics of self-tracking health practices between college students with disabilities and their counterparts. In addition, this study examines the relationships between disability status, self-tracking health practices, eHealth literacy, and subjective well-being among college students.

Methods:

The web-based questionnaire was designed using the Qualtrics for the online survey. The survey data was collected from February 2023 and April 2023 and included responses from 702 participants.

Results:

More than 80% of the respondents participated voluntarily in self-tracking health practices. The college students with disabilities (n = 83) showed significantly lower levels of eHealth literacy and subjective well-being compared to the college students without disabilities (n = 619). The group with disabilities reported significantly lower satisfaction (t = -5.97, P <.001) and perceived efficacy (t = -4.85 p <.001) when using smartphone health apps and wearable devices. Finally, the study identified a significant correlation between subjective well-being in college students and disability status (ꞵ = 3.81, P < .001), self-tracking health practices (ꞵ = 2.22, P < .05), and eHealth literacy (ꞵ = 24.29, P < .001).

Conclusions:

This study alerts the assumption that younger people will readily adopt and efficiently use technology for health management. It is important to closely examine young individuals' ability to utilize technology for actual health management. Given their lack of eHealth literacy skills, it is crucial for health educators in campus settings to provide personalized health consultations for both college students with and without disabilities to enhance the effective utilization of self-tracking health technology.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Choi S

Comparison of Self-Tracking Health Practices, eHealth Literacy, and Subjective Well-Being Between College Students With and Without Disabilities: Cross-Sectional Survey

JMIR Form Res 2024;8:e48783

DOI: 10.2196/48783

PMID: 38598285

PMCID: 11043924

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.