Trial · NCT07886645
The Effects of a Scenario-based Fact-checking Course on eHealth Literacy and Fact-checking Skills Among Older Adults.
NCT07886645, Not applicable, Not yet recruiting, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University
3 sourcestrials-2026-11-12-0.5.0
Cite this record
ConductScience Library. The Effects of a Scenario-based Fact-checking Course on eHealth Literacy and Fact-checking Skills Among Older Adults. Trials, record NCT07886645. Release trials-2026-11-12-0.5.0, 12 Nov 2026. https://conductscience.org/library/trials/NCT07886645
On this page
Trial
As registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, in the graph's capture of the registry.
- Title
- The Effects of a Scenario-based Fact-checking Course on eHealth Literacy and Fact-checking Skills Among Older Adults.
- NCT number
- NCT07886645
- Status
- Not yet recruiting
- Phases
- Not applicable
- Enrollment
- 100 participants, estimated
- Lead sponsor
- National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University
- Conditions
- eHealth Literacy, Digital Health Literacy, Fact Checking
- Interventions
- Scenario-Based Fact-Checking Course, Nutrition Education
- First posted
- 2026-10-21
- Last updated
- 2026-10-21
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Registered outcomes3
Each outcome the trial registered, primary first, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
| List | Outcome | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | eHealth Literacy | 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. |
| Primary | Digital Health Literacy (DHLI) | 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. |
| Primary | Health Information Judgment Accuracy | 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. |
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Outcomes0
Each outcome the trial posted results for, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
None in this release.
Results by group0
Each measurement the trial posted, group by group, in the words and numbers it posted.
None in this release.
Participant flow0
How many started, completed or left each group, period by period.
None in this release.
Adverse events0
Each adverse event the trial posted, group by group: the participants affected out of those at risk.
None in this release.
Adverse event totals0
The totals the trial posted for each group.
None in this release.
Papers0
The papers the trial lists on ClinicalTrials.gov.
None in this release.
Grants0
The grants NIH RePORTER links to the trial, newest funded first: NIH's, and some of AHRQ's, CDC's, FDA's and VA's. Each shows its title, principal investigators, organization and funder in its newest year.
None in this release.
Trial comparisons0
Comparisons of the trial's two groups, calculated by ConductScience from the counts it posted.
None in this release.
Tests0
The ConductCognition tests this trial's registered outcomes name, as ScienceGraph matched them in trial-tests-2026-11-12-0.2.1.
None in this release.
Data dates
The day each source was copied for this release.
Sources 3
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTFreely available. Acknowledgement requested
- ClinicalTrials.govNo license stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain
Each source's terms
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTClinicalTrials.gov data via Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT), CTTI. CTTI makes its materials freely available and requests acknowledgement. https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/documentation/299
- ClinicalTrials.govnone stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain (NIH RePORTER)
ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions.
For software
Read this trial from software.
The record and each of its lists are JSON, twenty rows a page. No key.
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT07886645
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT07886645/registered