Digital Health Literacy and Patient Experience in Digital Health Services: A Systematic Review of Engagement, Satisfaction, and Loyalty-Related Outcomes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55681/economina.v5i7.3057Keywords:
Digital Health Literacy, eHealth Literacy, Digital Patient Experience, Patient Satisfaction, Continuance Intention, Behavioural Intention.Abstract
Background: Digital health services (e.g., telemedicine, patient portals, and mobile health apps) are increasingly embedded in care delivery, making digital health literacy (DHL/eHealth literacy) a plausible determinant of service outcomes. Objective: This systematic literature review (SLR) synthesises empirical evidence on the association between DHL/eHL and patient-reported outcomes that are central to service management: digital patient experience, patient satisfaction, and loyalty-related outcomes (intention to use and continuance intention). Methods: A PEO-informed search was performed in Scopus using a structured query combining DHL/eHL terms, service outcomes, and digital service contexts. Primary empirical studies measuring DHL/eHL and reporting relevant outcomes among patients/end-users were eligible; non-empirical publications and studies without explicit DHL/eHL measurement were excluded. Study quality was appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for analytical cross-sectional studies. A narrative synthesis was conducted due to heterogeneity. Results: From 35 retrieved records, four cross-sectional studies (2020-2025) met inclusion and quality thresholds. Across mHealth apps, clinical digital services, online consultation and social-media-based consultation, higher DHL/eHL was consistently associated with stronger intention/continuance and higher satisfaction. Reported mechanisms involved technology acceptance perceptions (usefulness and ease of use), trust/privacy, digital information accessibility and attitudes, and patient-provider communication/empowerment processes. Conclusion: DHL/eHL appears to function as a foundational capability for positive digital service outcomes, but the evidence base is small and dominated by cross-sectional self-report designs. Longitudinal and intervention studies and more standardised outcome measurement are priorities for advancing theory and informing DHL-responsive service design.
Downloads
References
Alabdali, M. A., & Husain, K. S. (2023). Understanding the relationship between patient satisfaction and loyalty through telemedicine platform quality: An empirical study. International Journal of Healthcare Management, 18(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/20479700.2023.2290351
Aromataris, E., & Munn, Z. (2020). JBI manual for evidence synthesis. Joanna Briggs Institute. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-01
Bettany-Saltikov, J. (2012). How to do a systematic literature review in nursing: A step-by-step guide. Open University Press.
Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D. (2016). Systematic approaches to a successful literature review (2nd ed.). Sage.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Doyle, C., Lennox, L., & Bell, D. (2013). A systematic review of evidence on the links between patient experience and clinical safety and effectiveness. BMJ Open, 3(1), e001570. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001570
Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. National Academies Press.
Kickbusch, I., Piselli, D., Agrawal, A., Balicer, R., Banner, O., Adelhardt, M., ... & Xue, L. (2021). The Lancet and Financial Times Commission on governing health futures 2030: Growing up in a digital world. The Lancet, 398(10312), 1727–1776. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01824-9
Kim, H., & Xie, B. (2017). Health literacy in the eHealth era: A systematic review of the literature. Patient Education and Counseling, 100(6), 1073–1082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2017.01.015
Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Thelwall, M., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2018). Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. Scientometrics, 116(3), 2175–2195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5
Mensah, C., et al. (2024). Digital patient experience and patient loyalty in digital healthcare services. Health Informatics Journal.
Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
Moola, S., Munn, Z., Tufanaru, C., et al. (2020). JBI critical appraisal checklist for analytical cross-sectional studies. In E. Aromataris & Z. Munn (Eds.), JBI manual for evidence synthesis. Joanna Briggs Institute.
Neter, E., & Brainin, E. (2019). eHealth literacy: Extending the digital divide to the realm of health information. Health Expectations, 22(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12880
Norman, C. D., & Skinner, H. A. (2006). eHealth literacy: Essential skills for consumer health in a networked world. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 8(2), e9. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.8.2.e9
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Paige, S. R., Krieger, J. L., & Stellefson, M. (2018). The Digital Health Literacy Instrument: Development and psychometric evaluation. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 20(6), e36. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9411
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Blackwell Publishing.
Pollock, A., & Berge, E. (2018). How to do a systematic review. International Journal of Stroke, 13(2), 138–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747493017743796
Popay, J., Roberts, H., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Rodgers, M., ... & Duffy, S. (2006). Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. ESRC Methods Programme.
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Sørensen, K., Van den Broucke, S., Fullam, J., Doyle, G., Pelikan, J., Slonska, Z., & Brand, H. (2012). Health literacy and public health: A systematic review and integration of definitions and models. BMC Public Health, 12, 80. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-80
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375
van der Vaart, R., & Drossaert, C. (2017). Development of the Digital Health Literacy Instrument: Measuring a broad spectrum of health 1.0 and health 2.0 skills. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19(1), e27. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6709
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
World Health Organization. (2021). Global strategy on digital health 2020–2025. WHO. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240020924.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 JURNAL ECONOMINA
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
