CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Libyan International Medical University Journal 2019; 04(02): 74-81
DOI: 10.4103/LIUJ.LIUJ_25_19
Original Article

Health professional students' preparedness for E-Health

Adel A. Al-Tawaty
Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Libyan International Medical University, Benghazi, Libya
Ehab Omar Elfallah
1   Department of Software Engineering, Faculty of Information Technology, Libyan International Medical University, Benghazi, Libya
› Author Affiliations


Background: E-Health is one of the recent major developments in health-care provision. Today's health professional students are considered digitally oriented, and this may endow them with the necessary capabilities to implement E-Health on graduation. Aim: This study aimed to assess students' views, use, confidence, and need for training on E-Health. Participants: Fourth-, 5th- and internship-year students of the medical and dental schools at the Libyan International Medical University constituted the study population. Methodology: This is a cross-sectional study conducted using an online administered survey. Prior to implementation, the questionnaire was reviewed by experts and then piloted on a group of research-targeted students. Likert scale was used for most questions and few were in the form of short answers. Descriptive statistics were reported using SPSS software version 23.0. Results: One hundred and two students responded, and all responders were included for most select-response questions. The male-to-female ratio was 2:3, with a mean age of 24 ± 1.8 years. Medical students accounted for 52% of the participants. An average of 45% reported proficiency in written and spoken English. Only 12% have taken IT-related courses. Their view on E-Health was moderately positive with a mean of 3.5 ± 0.34 of 3.1 ± 1.029. In spite of this, 43% ± 3.9% had negative views on E-Health. Nearly 58% of the participants used digital tools and software with a mean score of 2.43 ± 0.6. Most students reported using social media, especially Facebook (mean 4.95 ± 1.7). The students reported a confidence level of information and communication technology (ICT) use of 3.4 ± 1.2. They also described their confidence in learning a new technology with a value of 3 ± 0.3. Almost 32.9% of the participants expressed an overall need for training on ICT tools. Conclusion: The overall preparedness of this group for ICT is moderate and needs improvement. This could be achieved through introducing changes in the taught curriculum.

Financial support and sponsorship


Publication History

Received: 22 October 2019

Accepted: 09 December 2019

Article published online:
10 June 2022

© 2019. Libyan International Medical University. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

  • References

  • 1 Oh H, Rizo C, Enkin M, Jadad A. What is eHealth (3): A systematic review of published definitions. J Med Internet Res 2005;7:e1.
  • 2 Available from: [“”].
  • 3 Lewis J, Ray P, Liaw ST. Recent worldwide developments in ehealth and mhealth to more effectively manage cancer and other chronic diseases – A systematic review. Yearb Med Inform 2016;(1):93-108.
  • 4 Vuong AM, Huber JC Jr., Bolin JN, Ory MG, Moudouni DM, Helduser J, et al. Factors affecting acceptability and usability of technological approaches to diabetes self-management: A case study. Diabetes Technol Ther 2012;14:1178-82.
  • 5 Kuijpers W, Groen WG, Aaronson NK, van Harten WH. A systematic review of web-based interventions for patient empowerment and physical activity in chronic diseases: Relevance for cancer survivors. J Med Internet Res 2013;15:e37.
  • 6 Bock BC, Graham AL, Whiteley JA, Stoddard JL. A review of web-assisted tobacco interventions (WATIs). J Med Internet Res 2008;10:e39.
  • 7 García PJ, Vargas JH, Caballero N P, Calle V J, Bayer AM. An e-health driven laboratory information system to support HIV treatment in Peru: E-quity for laboratory personnel, health providers and people living with HIV. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2009;9:50.
  • 8 Pal K, Dack C, Ross J, Michie S, Murray E. Integrating theory and data to create an online self-management programme for adults with type 2 diabetes: HeLP-Diabetes. Front. Public Health. Conference Abstract: 2nd Behaviour Change Conference: Digital Health and Wellbeing; 2016. doi: 10.3389/conf.FPUBH.2016.01.00005.
  • 9 Hebden L, Balestracci K, McGeechan K, Denney-Wilson E, Harris M, Bauman A, et al. 'TXT2BFiT' a mobile phone-based healthy lifestyle program for preventing unhealthy weight gain in young adults: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2013;14:75.
  • 10 Pellegrini CA, Duncan JM, Moller AC, Buscemi J, Sularz A, DeMott A, et al. A smartphone-supported weight loss program: Design of the ENGAGED randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health 2012;12:1041.
  • 11 Njoroge M, Zurovac D, Ogara EA, Chuma J, Kirigia D. Assessing the feasibility of eHealth and mHealth: A systematic review and analysis of initiatives implemented in Kenya. BMC Res Notes 2017;10:90.
  • 12 Combi C, Pozzani G, Pozzi G. Telemedicine for developing countries. A Survey and some design issues. Appl Clin Inform 2016;7:1025-50.
  • 13 Zeind CS, Blagg JD Jr., Amato MG, Jacobson S. Incorporation of Institute of Medicine competency recommendations within doctor of pharmacy curricula. Am J Pharm Educ 2012;76:83.
  • 14 Lam MK, Hines M, Lowe R, Nagarajan S, Keep M, Penman M, et al. Preparedness for eHealth: Health sciences students' knowledge, skills, and confidence. J Inf Technol Educ 2016;15:305-34. Available from: [Last accessed on 2018 Jan 05].
  • 15 Galesic M, Bosnjak M. Effects of questionnaire length on participation and indicators of response quality in a web survey. Public Opin Q 2009;73:349-60.
  • 16 Manfreda KL, Berzelak J, Vehovar V. Web surveys versus other survey modes: A meta-analysis comparing response rates. Int J Market Res 2008;50:79-104.
  • 17 Kehoe CM, Pitkow JE. Surveying the Territory: GVU's five WWW User Surveys; 1996. p. 77-84.
  • 18 Smith MA, Leigh B. Virtual subjects: Using the Internet as an alternative source of subjects and research environment. Behav Res Method Instrum Comput 1997;29:496-505.
  • 19 McCoy BR. Digital distractions in the classroom phase II: Student classroom use of digital devices for non-class related purposes. J Med Educ 2016;7:5-32.
  • 20 Chen B, deNoyelles S. Exploring students' mobile learning practices in higher education. Educ Rev 2013. Available from: [Last accessed on 2018 Feb 18].
  • 21 Prensky M. Digital natives, digital immigrants. Horizon 2001;9:1-6.
  • 22 Prensky M. How to Teach with Technology: Keeping Both Teachers and Students Comfortable in an Era of Exponential Change. Emerging Technologies for Learning. Vol. 2. Coventry, UK: BECTA; 2007. p. 40-6. Available from: [Last accessed on 2018 Jan 05].
  • 23 Deci EL, Vallerand RJ, Pelletier LG, Ryan RM. Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educ Psychol 2011;26:3-4. Available from: [Last accessed on 2018 Jun 12].
  • 24 Yeager DS, Dweck CS. Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that Personal characteristics can be developed. Educ Psychol 2012;4:302-14.