Volume 13, Issue 2 (2025)
Health Educ Health Promot 2025, 13(2): 265-272 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Norouzi Aval R, Kimiafar K, Sarbaz M, Mousavi Baigi S. Awareness and Level of Digital Literacy among Paramedical Students. Health Educ Health Promot 2025; 13 (2) :265-272
URL: http://hehp.modares.ac.ir/article-5-80679-en.html
URL: http://hehp.modares.ac.ir/article-5-80679-en.html
1- “Department of Health Information Technology, Faculty of Paramedical and Rehabilitation Sciences” and “Student Research Committee”, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
2- Department of Health Information Technology, Faculty of Paramedical and Rehabilitation Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
2- Department of Health Information Technology, Faculty of Paramedical and Rehabilitation Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
Abstract: (303 Views)
Aims: Digital literacy is a set of skills that enables individuals to effectively use digital technologies for learning, communication, and knowledge creation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the level of awareness and digital literacy among paramedical students.
Instrument & Methods: This cross-sectional study on students enrolled in the School of Paramedical Sciences and Rehabilitation at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences during the 2024 academic year was conducted from October 2024 to February 2025. Data were collected using a previously developed questionnaire by Aydınlar et al. in 2024. This questionnaire consisted of 31 questions and focused on topics, including demographic data, familiarity with programming, opinions on digital literacy, software, hardware, networks, ethics, security, artificial intelligence, and knowledge interest. The face validity of the questionnaire was assessed by faculty members, and its reliability was measured using the test-retest method. SPSS 26 software was used to analyze the data.
Findings: A total of 105 students responded to the survey. Sixty percent of the students were female, and 40% were male. Overall, more than half of the participants (51.4%) believed that digital literacy training was necessary but optional. In contrast, 30.5% stated that digital literacy training was necessary and mandatory. The domains of “interest-knowledge, artificial intelligence, network, ethics, and hardware” had the highest average scores, while the domains of “software and security” had the lowest averages. When examining the relationship between digital literacy domains and gender, the scores of men in the domain of “software and multimedia” were significantly higher than those of women (p-value=0.021).
Conclusion: There are both strengths and gaps in digital literacy among paramedical students and they have moderate to high competency in several key areas, particularly in artificial intelligence awareness, networking, hardware, and ethical considerations.
Instrument & Methods: This cross-sectional study on students enrolled in the School of Paramedical Sciences and Rehabilitation at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences during the 2024 academic year was conducted from October 2024 to February 2025. Data were collected using a previously developed questionnaire by Aydınlar et al. in 2024. This questionnaire consisted of 31 questions and focused on topics, including demographic data, familiarity with programming, opinions on digital literacy, software, hardware, networks, ethics, security, artificial intelligence, and knowledge interest. The face validity of the questionnaire was assessed by faculty members, and its reliability was measured using the test-retest method. SPSS 26 software was used to analyze the data.
Findings: A total of 105 students responded to the survey. Sixty percent of the students were female, and 40% were male. Overall, more than half of the participants (51.4%) believed that digital literacy training was necessary but optional. In contrast, 30.5% stated that digital literacy training was necessary and mandatory. The domains of “interest-knowledge, artificial intelligence, network, ethics, and hardware” had the highest average scores, while the domains of “software and security” had the lowest averages. When examining the relationship between digital literacy domains and gender, the scores of men in the domain of “software and multimedia” were significantly higher than those of women (p-value=0.021).
Conclusion: There are both strengths and gaps in digital literacy among paramedical students and they have moderate to high competency in several key areas, particularly in artificial intelligence awareness, networking, hardware, and ethical considerations.
Article Type: Descriptive & Survey |
Subject:
Technology of Health Education
Received: 2025/05/3 | Accepted: 2025/06/14 | Published: 2025/06/18
Received: 2025/05/3 | Accepted: 2025/06/14 | Published: 2025/06/18
References
1. Norouzi Aval R, Rafatpanah H, Sarbaz M, Mousavi Baigi SF, Kimiafar K. Identification and classification features of patient portal, a systematic review. Health Sci Rep. 2025;8(3):e70520. [Link] [DOI:10.1002/hsr2.70520]
2. Mardiah M, Pahamzah J, Baihaqi A. EFL students' awareness on digital literacy. J Engl Lang Teach Cult Stud. 2021;4(2):67-77. [Link]
3. Norouzi Aval R, Rafatpanah H, Sarbaz M, Vahidi Z, Boostani R, Zemorshidi F, et al. Identifying the information needs and desires of patients with HTLV-1 regarding the patient portal. Paramed Sci Mil Health. 2024;19(4):0-0. [Link]
4. Gilster P. Digital literacy. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1997. [Link]
5. Shabana Tabusum SZ, Saleem A, Batcha MS. Digital literacy awareness among arts and science college students in Tiruvallur district: A study. Int J Manag Stud Res. 2014;2(4):61-7. [Link]
6. American Library Association. Digital literacy, libraries, and public policy: Report of the office for information technology policy's digital literacy task force. Washington, DC: American Library Association; 2013. [Link]
7. Atasoy H, Greenwood BN, McCullough JS. The digitization of patient care: A review of the effects of electronic health records on health care quality and utilization. Annu Rev Public Health. 2019;40:487-500. [Link] [DOI:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-044206]
8. Norouzi Aval R, Mousavi Baigi SF, Sarbaz M, Kimiafar K. Security, privacy, and confidentiality in electronic prescribing systems: A review study. Front Health Inform. 2022;11(1):115. [Link] [DOI:10.30699/fhi.v11i1.374]
9. Krupinski EA. Improving patient care through medical image perception research. Policy Insights Behav Brain Sci. 2015;2(1):74-80. [Link] [DOI:10.1177/2372732215600451]
10. McBride S, Tietze M, Robichaux C, Stokes L, Weber E. Identifying and addressing ethical issues with use of electronic health records. Online J Issues Nurs. 2018;23(1). [Link] [DOI:10.3912/OJIN.Vol23No01Man05]
11. McCoy LG, Nagaraj S, Morgado F, Harish V, Das S, Celi LA. What do medical students actually need to know about artificial intelligence?. NPJ Digit Med. 2020;3(1):86. [Link] [DOI:10.1038/s41746-020-0294-7]
12. Mousavi Baigi SF, Dahmardeh Kemmak F, Sarbaz M, Norouzi Aval R, Kimiafar K. Application of artificial intelligence in occupational therapy: A systematic review. Health Educ Health Promot. 2024;12(3):513-20. [Link]
13. Kung TH, Cheatham M, Medenilla A, Sillos C, De Leon L, Elepaño C, et al. Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-assisted medical education using large language models. PLoS Digit Health. 2023;2(2):e0000198. [Link] [DOI:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000198]
14. Werner R, Henningsen M, Schmitz R, Guse AH, Augustin M, Gauer T. Digital health meets Hamburg integrated medical degree program iMED: Concept and introduction of the new interdisciplinary 2nd track digital health. GMS J Med Educ. 2020;37(6):Doc61. [Link]
15. Behrends M, Paulmann V, Koop C, Foadi N, Mikuteit M, Steffens S. Interdisciplinary teaching of digital competencies for undergraduate medical students-experiences of a teaching project by medical informatics and medicine. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2021;281:891-5. [Link] [DOI:10.3233/SHTI210307]
16. Aydınlar A, Mavi A, Kütükçü E, Kırımlı EE, Alış D, Akın A, et al. Awareness and level of digital literacy among students receiving health-based education. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24(1):38. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s12909-024-05025-w]
17. Öncül G. Defining the need: Digital literacy skills for first-year university students. J Appl Res High Educ. 2021;13(4):925-43. [Link] [DOI:10.1108/JARHE-06-2020-0179]
18. Grant DM, Malloy AD, Murphy MC. A comparison of student perceptions of their computer skills to their actual abilities. J Inf Technol Educ Res. 2009;8(1):141-60. [Link] [DOI:10.28945/164]
19. Goodyear MD, Krleza-Jeric K, Lemmens T. The declaration of Helsinki. BMJ. 2007;335(7621):624-5. [Link] [DOI:10.1136/bmj.39339.610000.BE]
20. Jacqueline AA. Digital literacy in the 21st century: Preparing students for the future workforce. Res Output J Arts Manag. 2024;3(3):40-3. [Link]
21. Maxwell CE, Maxwell EM. Gender differences in digital literacy among undergraduate students of faculty of education, Kogi State University: Implications for e-resources & library use. Adv Soc Sci Res J. 2014;1(7):96-108. [Link] [DOI:10.14738/assrj.17.492]
22. Gebhardt E, Thomson S, Ainley J, Hillman K. Gender differences in computer and information literacy: An in-depth analysis of data from ICILS. Cham: Springer; 2019. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-26203-7]
23. Chereka AA, Butta FW, Demsash AW, Kassie SY, Shibabaw AA, Dubale AT, et al. Examining internet use for health information seeking and influencing factors among undergraduate health science students in southwest Ethiopia. Heliyon. 2024;11(1):e41545. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e41545]
24. Lazaridou I, Perente-Memet M, Zachou M, Mavroforou A, Lazarides M. The knowledge of medical students about publication ethics. Arch Hell Med. 2017;34(5):700-4. [Link]
25. Nekuzad N, Ahmady S, Hosseini M, Mohamadkhani K. An analysis of life experiences in promoting e-health literacy of the medical sciences students: A conceptual model. Q J Res Plan High Educ. 2019;25(1):97-122. [Persian] [Link]
26. Barteit S, Guzek D, Jahn A, Bärnighausen T, Jorge MM, Neuhann F. Evaluation of e-learning for medical education in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review. Comput Educ. 2020;145:103726. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103726]
27. Krishnamurthy C, Shetteppanavar L. Digital literacy among female postgraduate students of Karnatak University, Dharwad, Karnataka, India: A study. Libr Philos Pract. 2019;1:1-16. [Link]
28. Momayyezi M, Fallahzadeh H, Momayyezi M. Evaluation of students awareness of concepts, computer software and using database in Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences. Res Med Educ. 2014;6(2):11-8. [Persian] [Link] [DOI:10.18869/acadpub.rme.6.2.11]
29. González-Gómez F, Guardiola J, Rodríguez ÓM, Alonso MÁM. Gender differences in e-learning satisfaction. Comput Educ. 2012;58(1):283-90. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.017]
30. Slusky L, Partow-Navid P. Students information security practices and awareness. J Inf Priv Secur. 2012;8(4):3-26. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/15536548.2012.10845664]
31. Fatokun FB, Hamid S, Norman A, Fatokun JO, editors. The impact of age, gender, and educational level on the cybersecurity behaviors of tertiary institution students: an empirical investigation on Malaysian universities. Journal of Physics: Conference Series; 2019: IOP Publishing. [Link] [DOI:10.1088/1742-6596/1339/1/012098]
32. Göldağ B. Investigation of the relationship between digital literacy levels and digital data security awareness levels of university students. E Int J Educ Res. 2021;12(3):82-100. [Turkish] [Link]
33. Abdolahi Shahvali E, Arizavi Z, Hematipour A, Jahangirimehr A. Investigating the level of knowledge, attitude and performance students regarding the applications of artificial intelligence in nursing. Jundishapur Sci Med J. 2024;23(2):134-42. [Persian] [Link] [DOI:10.32592/JSMJ.23.2.134]
34. Rjoop A, Al-Qudah M, Alkhasawneh R, Bataineh N, Abdaljaleel M, Rjoub MA, et al. Awareness and attitude toward artificial intelligence among medical students and pathology trainees: Survey study. JMIR Med Educ. 2025;11(1):e62669. [Link] [DOI:10.2196/62669]
35. Meraji M, Nourouziaval R, Marouzi P, Morshedlo Z, Mahmoodian S. Evaluating students' attitudes and usage e of mobile in educational activities at paramedical sciences school. J Med Educ Dev. 2019;14(4). [Link] [DOI:10.18502/jmed.v14i4.2550]
36. Lin TC. A computer literacy scale for newly enrolled nursing college students: Development and validation. J Nurs Res. 2011;19(4):305-17. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/JNR.0b013e318236d03f]
37. Than MM, Htike H, Silverman HJ. Knowledge, awareness, attitudes, and practices towards research ethics and research ethics committees among Myanmar post-graduate students. Asian Bioeth Rev. 2020;12(4):379-98. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s41649-020-00148-w]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |