Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Digital inclusiveness of health information websites

  • Long Paper
  • Published:
Universal Access in the Information Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examines the accessibility and mobile readiness of 25 of the top health information website homepages using mobile-readiness heuristics and an accessibility analysis based on a combination of automated and manual inspection of the website code. The paper also explores whether there might be a relationship between an organization meeting accessibility guidelines and an organization making its site mobile-ready and whether there is a difference between government and non-government website digital inclusiveness. The findings revealed that the overwhelming majority of the sites were at least partially mobile-ready, reformatting for a mobile screen, but that many of the sites violated critical accessibility guidelines. While non-government sites tended to be somewhat more mobile -ready, government sites were more likely to perform well when it came to accessibility testing. The results question whether health information providers are putting a higher priority on mobile-readiness than on accessibility to users with disabilities

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Goldberg, L., Lide, B., Lowry, S., Massett, H.A., O’Connell, T., Preece, J., Quesenbery, W., Shneiderman, B.: Usability and accessibility in consumer health informatics: current trends and future challenges. Am. J. Prev. Med. 40, S187–S197 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AMEPRE.2011.01.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Fox, S., Duggan, M.: Health Online 2013. Pew Research Center. National survey by the Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life Project (2013). http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/01/15/health-online-2013/. Accessed 5 Nov 2015

  3. Pew Research Center: Demographics of Mobile Device Ownership and Adoption in the United States | Pew Research Center. http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/mobile/. Accessed 17 June 2017

  4. Pew Research Center: US Smartphone Use in 2015 | Pew Research Center. http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/01/us-smartphone-use-in-2015/. Accessed 3 Dec 2015

  5. Newman, E.: Corporate Mobile Readiness Report: An Analysis of the Fortune 500’s Presence on the Mobile Web (2012)

  6. Klasnja, P., Pratt, W.: Healthcare in the pocket: mapping the space of mobile-phone health interventions. J. Biomed. Inform. 45, 184–198 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBI.2011.08.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chomutare, T., Fernandez-Luque, L., Arsand, E., Hartvigsen, G.: Features of mobile diabetes applications: review of the literature and analysis of current applications compared against evidence-based guidelines. J. Med. Internet Res. 13, e65 (2011). https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Abroms, L.C., Padmanabhan, N., Thaweethai, L., Phillips, T.: iPhone apps for smoking cessation: a content analysis. Am. J. Prev. Med. 40, 279–285 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AMEPRE.2010.10.032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Matthews, M., Doherty, G.: In the mood: engaging teenagers in psychotherapy using mobile phones. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, pp. 2947–2956 (2011)

  10. Ahtinen, A., Mattila, E., Vaatanen, A., Hynninen, L., Salminen, J., Koskinen, E., Laine, K.: User experiences of mobile wellness applications in health promotion: user study of wellness diary, mobile coach and SelfRelax. In: Proceedings of the 3d International ICST Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare, IEEE, pp. 1–8 (2009)

  11. McInnes, D.K., Fix, G.M., Solomon, J.L., Petrakis, B.A., Sawh, L., Smelson, D.A.: Preliminary needs assessment of mobile technology use for healthcare among homeless veterans. Peer J. 3, e1096 (2015). https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kumar, S., Nilsen, W.J., Abernethy, A., Atienza, A., Patrick, K., Pavel, M., Riley, W.T., Shar, A., Spring, B., Spruijt-Metz, D., Hedeker, D., Honavar, V., Kravitz, R., Lefebvre, C., Mohr, R., Murphy, D.C., Quinn, S.A., Shusterman, C., Swendeman, V.D: Mobile health technology evaluation: the mHealth evidence workshop. Am. J. Prev. Med. 45, 228–236 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AMEPRE.2013.03.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. van Velsen, L., Beaujean, D.J., van Gemert-Pijnen, J.E.: Why mobile health app overload drives us crazy, and how to restore the sanity. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 13, 23 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-13-23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. West, D.M.: State and Federal E-Government in the United States, 2002 (2002)

  15. Marcotte, E.: Responsive Web Design. New York (2014)

  16. Han, S., Yue, Z., He, D.: Understanding and supporting cross-device web search for exploratory tasks with mobile touch interactions. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 33, 1–34 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2738036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wroblewski, L.: Mobile First. A Book Apart, New York (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  18. McCorkindale, T., Morgoch, M.: An analysis of the mobile readiness and dialogic principles on Fortune 500 mobile websites. Public Relat. Rev. 39, 193–197 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PUBREV.2013.03.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Newman, E.: Corporate Mobile Readiness Report (2014)

  20. Vanderheiden, G.C.: Nomadicity, disability access, and the every-citizen interface. In: National Research Council (ed.) More Than Screen Deep: Toward Every-Citizen Interfaces to the Nation’s Information Infrastructure, pp. 297–306. National Academy Press, Washington, DC (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  21. W3C: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/. Accessed 3 June 2017

  22. US Census Bureau: American Community Survey (2008). https://factfinder2.census.gov/. Accessed 10 June 2012

  23. Zickuhr, K., Smith, A.: Digital Differences. Pew Internet and American Life Project (2012)

  24. United Nations: Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Optional Protocol (2007)

  25. United Nations: UN Enable—Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?navid=12&pid=150. Accessed 14 July 2017

  26. Olalere, A., Lazar, J.: Accessibility of US federal government home pages: section 508 compliance and site accessibility statements. Gov. Inf. Q. 28, 303–309 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. W3C: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/. Accessed 17 Jan 2018

  28. U.S. Access Board: Overview of the Final Rule—United States Access Board. https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-and-it/about-the-ict-refresh/overview-of-the-final-rule. Accessed 17 Jan 2017

  29. National Association of the Deaf v. Netflix, Inc.: No. 11-CV-30168-MAP (D. Mass. June 19, 2012)

  30. Equality Act: c. 15 (2010)

  31. Isa, W.A.R.W.M., Aziz, M.A., Razak, M.R.B.A.: Evaluating the accessibility of Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) websites in Malaysia. In: 2011 International Conference on User Science and Engineering (i-USEr), pp. 135–140. IEEE (2011)

  32. Lazar, J., Olalere, A., Wentz, B.: Investigating the accessibility and usability of job application web sites for blind users. J. Usabil. Stud. 7, 68–87 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Youngblood, N.E., Mackiewicz, J.: A usability analysis of municipal government website home pages in Alabama. Gov. Inf. Q. 29, 582–588 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GIQ.2011.12.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Yu, D.X., Parmanto, B.: US state government websites demonstrate better in terms of accessibility compared to federal government and commercial websites. Gov. Inf. Q. 28, 484–490 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2011.04.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Gilbertson, T.D., Machin, C.H.C.: Guidelines, icons and marketable skills. In: Proceedings of the International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility—W4A’12, p. 1. ACM Press, New York (2012)

  36. Loiacono, E.T., Romano, N.C., McCoy, S.: The state of corporate website accessibility. Commun. ACM. 52, 128 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1145/1562164.1562197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Xiong, L., Cobanoglu, C., Cummings, P., DeMicco, F.: Website accessibility of US based hospitality websites. In: Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2009, pp. 273–284. Springer, Vienna (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. West, D.M., Miller, E.A.: The digital divide in public e-health: barriers to accessibility and privacy in state health department websites. J. Health Care Poor Underserved. 17, 652–667 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2006.0115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Zeng, X., Parmanto, B.: Web content accessibility of consumer health information web sites for people with disabilities: a cross sectional evaluation. J. Med. Internet Res. 6, e19 (2004). https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6.2.e19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Reichow, B., Shefcyk, A., Bruder, M.B.: Quality comparison of websites related to developmental disabilities. Res. Dev. Disabil. 34, 3077–3083 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RIDD.2013.06.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Hackett, S., Parmanto, B., Zeng, X., Hackett, S., Parmanto, B., Zeng, X.: Accessibility of Internet websites through time. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility—ASSETS’04, p. 32. ACM Press, New York (2004)

  42. Hanson, V.L., Richards, J.T.: Progress on website accessibility? ACM Trans. Web. 7, 1–30 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1145/2435215.2435217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lüchtenberg, M., Kuhli-Hattenbach, C., Sinangin, Y., Ohrloff, C., Schalnus, R.: Accessibility of health information on the internet to the visually impaired user. Ophthalmologica. 222, 187–193 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1159/000126082

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Geiger, B., Evans, R., Cellitti, M., Hogan Smith, K., O, M.R., Firsing, I.I.I., Chandan, S.P: The healthy web—access to online health information for individuals with disabilities. Int. Electron. J. Health Educ. 14, 93–100 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Mancini, C., Zedda, M., Barbaro, A.: Health information in Italian public health websites: moving from inaccessibility to accessibility. Heal. Inf. Libr. J. 22, 276–285 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2005.00602.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. O’Grady, L.: Accessibility compliance rates of consumer-oriented Canadian health care Web sites. Med. Inform. Internet Med. 30, 287–295 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1080/14639230500367746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Liang, H., Xue, Y., Chase, S.K.: Online health information seeking by people with physical disabilities due to neurological conditions. Int. J. Med. Inform. 80, 745–753 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJMEDINF.2011.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. West, D.M.: State and Federal Electronic Government in the United States, 2008. (2008)

  49. Fuglerud, K.S., Røssvoll, T.H.: An evaluation of web-based voting usability and accessibility. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 11, 359–373 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-011-0253-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Jaeger, P.T.: Assessing section 508 compliance on federal e-government web sites: a multi-method, user-centered evaluation of accessibility for persons with disabilities. Gov. Inf. Q. 23, 169–190 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GIQ.2006.03.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. AChecker: IDI Web Accessibility Checker: Web Accessibility Checker. https://achecker.ca/checker/index.php. Accessed 17 Jan 2017

  52. Shneiderman, B.: Universal usability. Commun. ACM. 43, 84–91 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1145/332833.332843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Johnson, R., Kent, S.: Designing universal access: web-applications for the elderly and disabled. Cogn. Technol. Work. 9, 209–218 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-007-0063-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M., Gurrea, R.: The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Inf. Manag. 43, 1–14 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IM.2005.01.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Fogg, B.J., Soohoo, C., Danielson, D.R., Marable, L., Stanford, J., Tauber, E.R.: How do users evaluate the credibility of web sites? In: Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Designing for user experiences—DUX’03, p. 1 (2003)

  56. Holzinger, A., Treitler, P., Slany, W.: Making apps useable on multiple different mobile platforms: on interoperability for business application development on smartphones. Multidiscip. Res. Pract. Inf. Syst. 2012, 176–189 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Vatavu, R.-D.: Visual impairments and mobile touchscreen interaction: state-of-the-art, causes of visual impairment, and design guidelines. Int. J. Hum Comput Interact. 33, 486–509 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2017.1279827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Alexa: Alexa—Top Sites by Category: Health.http://www.alexa.com/topsites/category/Top/Health. Accessed 6 Nov 2015

  59. Alexa: Alexa Internet—Our Data. https://support.alexa.com/hc/en-us/articles/200449744-How-are-Alexa-s-traffic-rankings-determined. Accessed 16 Nov 2015

  60. Shen, X., Li, D., Shen, C.: Evaluating China’s university library Web sites using correspondence analysis. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 57, 493–500 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Lin, L.: Empirical study on evaluation of tourism web sites in China. In: MSIE 2011, pp. 497–499. IEEE (2011)

  62. Kanellopoulos, D., Kotsiantis, S.: Evaluating and recommending Greek newspapers’ websites using clustering. Program 46, 71–91 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1108/00330331211204575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Lewis, M.S., Marvel, H.P.: When do consumers search? J. Ind. Econ. 59, 457–483 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6451.2011.00459.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Lo, B.W.N., Sedhain, R.S.: How reliable are website rankings? Implications for e-business advertising and Internet search. Issues Inf. Syst. 7, 233–238 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Lo, B.W.N., Kao, F.J.: Variation in country-based ranking lists among consumers’ choices of top e-commerce web sites: implications for international e-marketing. Int. J. Bus. Inf. 3, 1 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 217 Tichenor Hall, School of Communication and Journalism, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, 36849, USA

    Norman E. Youngblood

Authors
  1. Norman E. Youngblood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Norman E. Youngblood.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Youngblood, N.E. Digital inclusiveness of health information websites. Univ Access Inf Soc 19, 69–80 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-018-0629-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-018-0629-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation