European Journal of Health Communication <p>The European Journal of Health Communication (EJHC) is a peer-reviewed open access journal for high-quality health communication research with relevance to Europe or specific European countries. It aims to represent the international character of health communication research given the cultural, political, economic, and academic diversity in Europe.&nbsp;</p> University of Zurich, IKMZ – Department of Communication and Media Research en-US European Journal of Health Communication 2673-5903 <p>The authors agree to the following license and copyright agreement:</p> <p><em>a.</em> Authors retain copyright in their work.</p> <p><em>b.</em> Authors grant the European Journal of Health Communication the right of first publication online on the internet (on the publication platform HOPE of the Main Library of the University of Zurich).</p> <p><em>c.</em> The electronic contributions on the internet are distributed under the „Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International“- License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows others to copy and redistribute the work in any medium or format, to remix, transform and build upon the material with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in the European Journal of Health Communication . These conditions are irrevocable. The full text of the license may be read under <a href="" target="_blank" rel="noopener"></a>.</p> <p><em>d.</em> Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of their work, as long as the conditions of the CC BY 4.0 License are fulfilled and initial publication in the European Journal of Health Communication is acknowledged.</p> <p><em>e.</em> Authors grant the Editors commercial rights, using a publishing house, to produce hardcopy volumes of the journal for sale to libraries and individuals, as well as to integrate the manuscript, its title, and its abstract in databases, abstracting and indexing services, and other similar information services.</p> <p><em>f.</em> This agreement is subject to possible legal disclosure obligations.</p> <p><em>g.</em> This agreement is governed by Swiss law. Court of jurisdiction is Zürich.</p> Patterns of Online Information Seeking and Avoidance about SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 <p>Based on the uncertainty management theory considering different information-based coping strategies that are relevant during health crises, the purpose of the present study is to understand how individuals seek and avoid information during the COVID-19 pandemic. We focus on online information seeking and avoidance because of the high share of people searching for information about the pandemic online and the questionable quality of information about the virus available online. Data for this qualitative exploratory study were collected in semi-structured interviews with 21 participants. Our findings revealed four information-seeking patterns that can be located on a continuum between more active, targeted, and less purposeful acquisitions of information, and three avoidance patterns that are distinguished by different motives to avoid certain information. The findings on specific factors involved in individuals’ choices between seeking and avoiding information will help to design better information environments and to identify barriers to the adequate use of information during such crises.</p> Elena Link Magdalena Rosset Anna Freytag Copyright (c) 2022 Elena Link, Magdalena Rosset, Anna Freytag 2022-04-21 2022-04-21 3 1 53 75 10.47368/ejhc.2022.103 Shared Decision Making in Clinical Practice <p>Shared Decision Making (SDM), currently considered a preferred model for making decisions in healthcare, requires that patients have the knowledge and skills to actively participate in the consultation and decision-making process. Patients with limited health literacy (LHL) often fail to do so. To gain insight into the experiences, needs and support for LHL-patients concerning SDM in clinical practice, five focus groups were held with 26 patients with LHL. A focus group discussion guide was developed based on 4-steps SDM models. Data was coded using thematic content analyses. LHL patients participating in this study had little experience with SDM in practice, but do prefer it. Important barriers for this are healthcare provider-related (involving patients too little in decision-making, using medical jargon), patient-related (feeling insecure to play a role in decision-making, inability to understand their diagnosis or information about treatment options), patient-provider interaction-related (relationship of trust) or system-related (too little consultation time). For SDM to take place more often, a shared responsibility between patients and healthcare providers is required. We recommend expanding the SDM models, by adding a step zero (patients understand their diagnosis) and a fifth step (reviewing the decision), to improve the process for LHL patients.</p> Janneke Noordman Mariska Oosterveld-Vlug Jany Rademakers Copyright (c) 2022 Janneke Noordman, Mariska Oosterveld-Vlug, Jany Rademakers 2022-02-24 2022-02-24 3 1 31 52 10.47368/ejhc.2022.102 Informed Decision Making on the Uptake of Evidence-Based Smoking Cessation Assistance by Individuals Motivated to Quit Smoking <p>Evidence-based cessation assistance increases cessation rates. Activating preferences during decision making could improve effectiveness further. Decision aids (DAs) facilitate deciding by taking preferences into account. To develop effective DAs, potential end users' (i.e., individuals motivated to quit) needs and experts' viewpoints should be considered. Therefore, the aim of this needs assessment was: (1) To explore end users' needs and (2) to obtain consensus among smoking cessation counsellors and scientific experts to develop a self-administered DA to support end users in choosing cessation assistance. Data was gathered via two approaches: (1) twenty semi-structured interviews with potential end users and (2) two three-round Delphi studies with 61 counsellors and 44 scientific experts. Interview data and the first Delphi rounds were analysed qualitatively, the other Delphi rounds were analysed quantitatively. Potential end users acquired information in different ways, e.g., via own experiences. Important characteristics to decide between tools varied, however effectiveness and costs were commonly reported. Experts reached consensus on 38 and 40 statements, e.g., tools should be appropriate for users' addiction level. Although some trends emerged, due to the variation among stakeholders, a 'one size fits all'-approach is undesirable. This heterogeneity should be considered, e.g., by enabling users to customise the DA.</p> Thomas Gültzow Eline S. Smit Raesita Hudales Carmen D. Dirksen Ciska Hoving Copyright (c) 2022 Thomas Gültzow, Eline S. Smit, Raesita Hudales, Carmen D. Dirksen, Ciska Hoving 2022-01-04 2022-01-04 3 1 1 30 10.47368/ejhc.2022.101 Acknowledgements 2021 <p>In this editorial, we look back at 2021 and want to acknowledge and thank all those who have contributed to the European Journal of Health Communication by reviewing submissions, serving as editors, or submitting their work.</p> EJHC Management Team Copyright (c) 2022 EJHC Management Team 2022-02-11 2022-02-11 3 1 I II 10.47368/ejhc.2022.100