Background　People　increasingly　use　the　Internet　to　seek　health　information.　However,　the　overall　quality　of　online　health　information　remains　low.　This　situation　is　exacerbated　by　the　unprecedented　＂infodemic＂,　which　has　had　negative　consequences　for　patients.　Therefore,　it　is　important　to　understand　how　users　make　judgements　about　health　information　by　applying　different　judgement　criteria.　Objective　The　objective　of　this　study　is　to　determine　how　patients　apply　different　criteria　in　their　judgement　of　the　quality　of　online　health　information　during　the　pandemic.　In　particular,　we　investigate　whether　there　is　consistency　between　the　likelihood　of　using　a　particular　judgement　criterion　and　its　perceived　importance　among　different　groups　of　users.　Methods　A　cross-sectional　survey　was　conducted　in　one　of　the　leading　hospitals　in　a　coastal　province　of　China　with　a　population　of　forty　million.　Combined-strategy　sampling　was　used　to　balance　the　randomness　and　the　practicality　of　the　recruiting　process.　A　total　of　1063　patients　were　recruited　for　this　study.　Chi-square　and　Kruskal-Wallis　analyses　were　used　to　analyse　the　survey　data.　Results　In　general,　patients　make　quality　judgement　of　health　information　more　frequently　based　on　whether　it　is　familiar,　aesthetic,　and　with　expertise.　In　comparison,　they　put　more　weights　on　whether　health　information　is　secure,　trustworthy,　and　with　expertise　when　determining　its　quality.　Criteria　that　were　considered　more　important　were　not　always　those　with　a　higher　likelihood　of　being　used.　Patients　may　not　use　particular　criteria,　such　as　familiarity,　identification,　and　readability,　more　frequently　than　others　even　if　they　consider　them　to　be　more　important　than　other　do　and　vice　versa.　Surprisingly,　patients　with　a　primary　school　degree　put　more　weight　on　whether　health　information　is　comprehensive　than　those　with　higher　degrees　do　in　determining　its　quality.　However,　they　are　less　likely　to　use　this　guideline　in　practice.　Conclusions　To　the　best　of　our　knowledge,　this　is　the　first　study　to　investigate　the　consistency　between　the　likelihood　of　using　certain　quality　judgement　criteria　and　their　perceived　importance　among　patients　grouped　by　different　demographic　variables　and　eHealth　literacy　levels.　The　findings　highlight　how　to　improve　online　health　information　services　and　provide　fine-grained　customization　of　information　for　users.