Click, Confuse, Convert? Digital Health Information Seeking, Perceived Usefulness and Reliability of Online Health Information, and Alternative Medicine Use and Beliefs

Background Using a large cross-national dataset (N ≈ 23,000), this study investigates the relationship between several aspects of online health-seeking and the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), as well as the belief that CAM is better than conventional medicine in Western societies. It also examines how perceptions of the internet as a useful tool to guide health decisions, and perceived reliability of online information, relate to CAM use and beliefs about its superiority. Methods Ordinal logistic regression models were used to assess the association between online health-seeking behavior, perceived usefulness and reliability of online health information, and two outcomes: CAM use and belief in CAM superiority over conventional medicine. Analyses were based on data from the 2021 ISSP module on Health and Healthcare, restricted to Western countries. Results Findings reveal a significant, graded association between more frequent online health-seeking and both higher CAM use and stronger belief that CAM is better than conventional medicine. Those who perceived the internet as useful for verifying doctors’ advice or evaluating symptoms also had significantly higher odds of CAM use and belief in its superiority. Notably, those expressing uncertainty about the reliability of online health information were more likely to report CAM use and belief in CAM’s superiority. Conclusions These results suggest that the digital health landscape may simultaneously empower and confuse users, potentially facilitating engagement with complementary therapies in the absence of clear evaluative guidance. This study highlights the need to integrate CAM into institutional healthcare frameworks, develop legal standards for CAM use, promote digital health literacy, and improve doctor–patient communication. Trial registration Not applicable