
AbstractAimThis study aimed to determine the electronic health (e‐health) literacy level of high school students and its relationship with their health‐promoting behaviours.MethodsThis was a cross‐sectional study conducted between April and May 2018. The study sample consisted of 409 students, who were aged between 14 and 19 years old, in three high schools located in the city centre of Denizli. Multiple regression analyses were performed to examine the predictive variables for six dimensions of health‐promoting behaviours.ResultsIn this study, the mean (SD) e‐health literacy score of 27.89 (6.19) was slightly above moderate level. e‐Health literacy was found to significantly predict all six dimensions of health‐promoting behaviours positively, that is, e‐health literacy was determined to predict the dimensions of nutritional behaviours (β = 0.64, P < 0.001), life appreciation (β = 0.55, P < 0.001), social support (β = 0.72, P < 0.001), exercise (β = 0.36, P < 0.001), stress management (β = −0.22, P < 0.001) and health responsibility (β = 0.68, P < 0.001).ConclusionWith e‐health literacy significantly predictive of health‐promoting behaviours, nurses are recommended to consider the e‐health literacy levels of adolescents in the health‐promoting programs they design.
Risk, Male, Adolescent, high school students, United-States, Health Promotion, Sampling Studies, 796, Education, e‐, Young Adult, nursing, Humans, Challenge, Students, Exercise, Social Support, promoting behaviours, Health Literacy, Cross-Sectional Studies, adolescent, health‐, Female, Electronics, health literacy, Ehealth Literacy
Risk, Male, Adolescent, high school students, United-States, Health Promotion, Sampling Studies, 796, Education, e‐, Young Adult, nursing, Humans, Challenge, Students, Exercise, Social Support, promoting behaviours, Health Literacy, Cross-Sectional Studies, adolescent, health‐, Female, Electronics, health literacy, Ehealth Literacy
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 46 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
