(PS2-59) Correlates of Critical Thinking About Health

Abstract Text:

Background: In an era of widespread health misinformation and inequities, the ability to critically evaluate health information and make informed and empowered health choices is increasingly crucial, yet many individuals lack these skills. Parents are a particularly important population to study in terms of correlates of critical thinking about health, as they are responsible for healthcare decisions for both themselves and their children and are regularly confronted with healthcare claims. Investigating potential correlates of critical thinking about health (e.g., evidence-based practice attitudes) can help to identify factors that may influence their ability to make informed, evidence-based health decisions for themselves and their children, ultimately improving public health outcomes.

Methods: In the context of an online randomized control trial of a health-related critical thinking intervention with U.S. parents, we recruited 250 parents through MTurk. Participants completed a measure of demographics and treatment history, a 5-item measure of preferences for various treatment elements, the Consumer Attitudes Towards Evidence Based Services Scale (CAEBS; 29 items, 4 factors), and a 3-item measure of vaccine hesitancy. Participants were a mean age of 35 years old, 49% female, and 75% White, 17% African American, 14% Hispanic/Latino, and 5% Asian American. Approximately half of parents had a bachelor’s degree.

Results: Better critical thinking abilities in parents were related to the following factors: 1) higher intention to learn whether a treatment claim is based on a fair comparison study (B = .27; p < .01), 2) more positive and more negative EBP attitudes (e.g., Beliefs Regarding Therapists’ Practices CAEBS scale: B = .344; p < .001; Negative Personal-Level Attitudes towards EBPs CAEBS scale: B = -.042, p < .001), 3) varied preferences toward mental health therapy (e.g., preference of receiving effective therapies backed by research: B = .014, p < .001; preference for a therapist allowing them to speak the majority of the therapy session: B = -.02, p < .001), and 4) more favorable attitudes toward vaccines (B = -.082, p < .001). None of the demographic characteristics were related to critical appraisal.

Conclusions: This is one of the first studies to examine critical thinking about health alongside mental health-related constructs. These findings could inform the development and refinement of future tailored critical thinking interventions for the public. Due to the exploratory nature of this study, further research is necessary to better understand these correlates and their practical implications.