scholarly journals Assessment of quality of information available over the internet about vegan diet

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 1142-1152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivia Genevieve El Jassar ◽  
Isobel Nadia El Jassar ◽  
Evangelos I. Kritsotakis
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Vegan Diet ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Quality Of Information ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
Written Information

Purpose This paper aims to assess the quality of health information available to patients seeking online advice about the vegan diet. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional sample of patient-oriented websites was selected by searching for “Vegan diet” in the three most popular search engines. The first 50 websites from each search were examined. Quality of information was assessed using the DISCERN instrument, a questionnaire tool designed to judge the quality of written information on treatment choices. Readability was determined with the Flesch Reading Ease score (FRES) and Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL). Relevance to health and disease was assessed by counting the appearances of ten related keywords, generated by searching the query term “Vegan diet” into PubMed and recording the top ten health-related words. Findings Of 150 websites retrieved, 67 (44.7 per cent) met inclusion criteria. Of these, 42 (62.7 per cent) were non-pharmaceutical commercial, 7 (10.4 per cent) institutional, 6 (9.0 per cent) magazines or newspapers, 4 (6.0 per cent) support websites, 4 (6.0 per cent) charitable websites, 2 (3.0 per cent) encyclopedias and 2 (3.0 per cent) personal blogs. The overall DISCERN rating of the websites was fair (mean 41.6 ± 15.4 on an 80-point scale), but nearly half (31/67) of the websites were assessed as having “poor” or “very poor” quality of information. FRES and FKGL readability indices met the recommended standards on average (means 63.3 ± 9.6 and 6.6 ± 1.7, respectively), but did not correlate with high DISCERN ratings. Analysis of variance on DISCERN scores (F(6,60) = 6.536, p < 0.001) and FRES (F(6,60) = 2.733, p = 0.021) yielded significant variation according to website source type. Originality/value Quality standards of health information available on the internet about the vegan diet vary greatly. Patients are at risk of exposure to low quality and potentially misleading information over the internet and should be consulting dietitians or physicians to avoid being misled.

The reliability of the Internet for patient-centred education for surgical procedures

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 197-203
Author(s):  
Ca Slinger ◽  
I Smillie
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Procedures ◽  
Patient Information ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Reading Level ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
Written Information ◽  
Ease Score

Background There is increasing use of the Internet by patients as an educational tool prior to a surgical procedure. However, the quality of information is highly variable, and it is imperative that as clinicians, we are aware of the information available to ensure that consent is valid and avoid unrealistic expectations. Our aim is to assess the quality of medical information available on the Internet related to common surgical procedures. Methods Analysis of the quality of patient information on 10 websites for six common surgical conditions ( n = 54 following exclusions) was assessed using the DISCERN questionnaire and, for readability, using the Flesch reading ease test. Results There was high variation in the DISCERN score from 1.34 to 4.4 (mean 2.75). Overall, poor quality of patient information is available. Consistent scoring below 55 on Flesch reading ease score suggests a reading level beyond the majority of the patient population. Conclusion The majority of patient-centred health education on the Internet is poor. Therefore, improved verbal and written information during consultation combined with local, national and international websites is important to meet patient’s expectations and avoid issues regarding consent.

scholarly journals Methods for evaluating the quality of information on health websites: Systematic Review (2001-2014)

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 994-1056
Author(s):  
Rodolfo Paolucci ◽  
André Pereira Neto
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Methodological Framework ◽  
Quality Of Information ◽  
Information Updating

The Internet is a major source of health information, but the poor quality of the information has been criticized for decades. We looked at methods for assessing the quality of health information, updating the findings of the first systematic review from 2002. We searched 9 Health Sciences, Information Sciences, and multidisciplinary databases for studies. We identified 7,718 studies and included 299. Annual publications increased from 9 (2001) to 53 (2013), with 89% from developed countries. We identified 20 areas of knowledge. Six tools have been used worldwide, but 43% of the studies did not use any of them. The methodological framework of criteria from the first review has been the same. The authors were the evaluators in 80% of the studies. This field of evaluation is expanding. No instrument simultaneously covers the evaluation criteria. There is still a need for a methodology involving experts and users and evidence-based indicators of accuracy.

scholarly journals The Absence of Evidence is Evidence of Non-Sense: Cross-Sectional Study on the Quality of Psoriasis-Related Videos on YouTube and Their Reception by Health Seekers (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon M Mueller ◽  
Pierre Jungo ◽  
Lucian Cajacob ◽  
Simon Schwegler ◽  
Peter Itin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Total Duration ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Global Quality ◽  
Quality Video ◽  
Depth Study

BACKGROUND Approximately 80% of internet users access health information online and patients with chronic illnesses especially rely on internet-based resources. YouTube ranks second among the most accessed websites worldwide and hosts an increasing number of videos with medical information. However, their quality is sometimes unscientific, misleading, or even harmful. OBJECTIVE As little is known about YouTube as a source of information on psoriasis, we aimed to investigate the quality of psoriasis-related videos and, if necessary, point out strategies for their improvement. METHODS The quality of the 100 most viewed psoriasis-related videos was assessed using the DISCERN instrument and the Global Quality Scale (GQS) by categorizing the videos into useful, misleading, and dangerous and by evaluating the reception of the videos by users. RESULTS Evaluation of the videos exhibited a total of 117,221,391 views and a total duration of 10:28 hour. The majority of clips contained anecdotal personal experiences with complementary and alternative psoriasis treatments, topical treatments, and nutrition and diets being the most frequently addressed topics. While advertisements accounted for 26.0% (26/100) of the videos, evidence-based health information amounted to only 20.0% (20/100); 32.0% (32/100) of the videos were classified as useful, 52.0% (52/100) as misleading, and 11.0% (11/100) as even dangerous. The quality of the videos evaluated by DISCERN and GQS was generally low (1.87 and 1.95, respectively, on a 1 to 5 scale with 5 being the maximum). Moreover, we found that viewers rated poor-quality videos better than higher quality videos. CONCLUSIONS Our in-depth study demonstrates that nearly two-thirds of the psoriasis-related videos we analyzed disseminate misleading or even dangerous content. Subjective anecdotal and unscientific content is disproportionately overrepresented and poor-quality videos are predominantly rated positively by users, while higher quality video clips receive less positive ratings. Strategies by professional dermatological organizations are urgently needed to improve the quality of information on psoriasis on YouTube and other social media.

scholarly journals Quality and readability of web-based Arabic health information on periodontal disease

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Sultan Al-Ak’hali ◽  
Hytham N. Fageeh ◽  
Esam Halboub ◽  
Mohammed Nasser Alhajj ◽  
Zaihan Ariffin
Keyword(s):  
Periodontal Disease ◽  
Health Professional ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Quality Information ◽  
Quality Of Information ◽  
Web Based ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background Currently, the Internet seems to be a helpful tool for obtaining information about everything that we think about, including diseases, their prevention and treatment approaches. However, doubts exist regarding the quality and readability of such information. This study sought to assess the quality and readability of web-based Arabic information on periodontal disease. Methods In this infodemiological study, the Google, Yahoo!, and Bing search engines were searched using specific Arabic terms on periodontal disease. The first 100 consecutive websites from each engine were obtained. The eligible websites were categorized as commercial, health/professional, journalism, and other. The following tools were applied to assess the quality of the information on the included websites: the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode), the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, and the DISCERN tool. The readability was assessed using an online readability tool. Results Of the 300 websites, 89 were eligible for quality and readability analyses. Only two websites (2.3%) were HONcode certified. Based on the DISCERN tool, 43 (48.3%) websites had low scores. The mean score of the JAMA benchmarks was 1.6 ± 1.0, but only 3 (3.4%) websites achieved “yes” responses for all four JAMA criteria. Based on the DISCERN tool, health/professional websites revealed the highest quality of information compared to other website categories. Most of the health/professional websites revealed moderate-quality information, while 55% of the commercial websites, 66% of journalism websites, and 43% of other websites showed poor quality information. Regarding readability, most of the analyzed websites presented simple and readable written content. Conclusions Aside from readable content, Arabic health information on the analyzed websites on periodontal disease is below the required level of quality.

A Methodology to Analyze the Quality of Health Information on the Internet

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sundeep Chumber ◽  
Jörg Huber ◽  
Pietro Ghezzi
Keyword(s):  
American Medical Association ◽  
Medical Association ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Quality Of Information ◽  
Patient Groups ◽  
Assess Quality ◽  
Available Information

Purpose The purpose of this work was to evaluate the criteria used to assess the quality of information on diabetic neuropathy on the Internet. Methods Different search engines (Google, Yahoo, Bing, and Ask) and 1 governmental health website (MedlinePlus) were studied. The websites returned (200 for each search engine) were then classified according to their affiliation (eg, commercial, professional, patient groups). A scoring system was devised from the literature to assess quality of information. Websites were also analyzed using the 2 most widely used instruments for assessing the quality of health information, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) scoring system and the Health On the Net Foundation (HON) certification. Results Professional websites or health portals scored better according to most criteria. Google and MedlinePlus returned results scoring significantly higher than other engines in some of the criteria. The use of different instruments gave different results and indicates that the JAMA score and the HON certification may not be sufficient ones. Conclusions This methodology could be used to evaluate the reliability and trustworthiness of information on the Internet on different topics to identify topic areas or websites where the available information is not appropriate.

scholarly journals Quality of information sources about mental disorders: a comparison of Wikipedia with centrally controlled web and printed sources

2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (8) ◽  
pp. 1753-1762 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. J. Reavley ◽  
A. J. Mackinnon ◽  
A. J. Morgan ◽  
M. Alvarez-Jimenez ◽  
S. E. Hetrick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Information Sources ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Quality Of Information ◽  
Mental Health Information ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Better Than

BackgroundAlthough mental health information on the internet is often of poor quality, relatively little is known about the quality of websites, such as Wikipedia, that involve participatory information sharing. The aim of this paper was to explore the quality of user-contributed mental health-related information on Wikipedia and compare this with centrally controlled information sources.MethodContent on 10 mental health-related topics was extracted from 14 frequently accessed websites (including Wikipedia) providing information about depression and schizophrenia, Encyclopaedia Britannica, and a psychiatry textbook. The content was rated by experts according to the following criteria: accuracy, up-to-dateness, breadth of coverage, referencing and readability.ResultsRatings varied significantly between resources according to topic. Across all topics, Wikipedia was the most highly rated in all domains except readability.ConclusionsThe quality of information on depression and schizophrenia on Wikipedia is generally as good as, or better than, that provided by centrally controlled websites, Encyclopaedia Britannica and a psychiatry textbook.

scholarly journals Quality of information of websites dedicated to obesity: a systematic search to promote high level of information for Internet users and professionals

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Perra ◽  
Antonio Preti ◽  
Valerio De Lorenzo ◽  
Antonio Egidio Nardi ◽  
Mauro G. Carta
Keyword(s):  
Poor Quality ◽  
Quality Of Information ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
Internet Users ◽  
Treatment Support ◽  
Technological Quality ◽  
Level I ◽  
High Level

Abstract Background The Internet is increasingly used as a source of information. This study investigates with a multidimensional methodology the quality of information of websites dedicated to obesity treatment and weight-loss interventions. We compared websites in English, a language that it is used for the international scientific divulgation, and in Italian, a popular local language. Methods Level of Evidence: Level I, systematic review search on four largely used search engines. Duplicated and unrelated websites were excluded. We checked: popularity with PageRank; technological quality with Nibbler; readability with the Flesch Reading Ease test or the Gulpease readability index; quality of information with the DISCERN scale, the JAMA benchmark criteria, and the adherence to the Health on the Net Code. Results 63 Italian websites and 41 English websites were evaluated. English websites invested more in the technological quality especially for the marketing, experience of the user, and mobile accessibility. Both the Italian and English websites were of poor quality and readability. Conclusions These results can inform guidelines for the improvement of health information and help Internet users to achieve a higher level of information. Users must find benefits of treatment, support to the shared decision-making, the sources used, the medical editor's supervision, and the risk of postponing the treatment.

Quality of Novel coronavirus related health information over the Internet: An evaluation study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashish Joshi ◽  
Fnu Kajal ◽  
Priya Sharma ◽  
Ashruti Bhatt ◽  
Kanishk Kumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Information Dissemination ◽  
Keyword Search ◽  
Large Family ◽  
Evaluation Study ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Kappa Statistics ◽  
Quality Of Information ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

BACKGROUND A Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak was declared a pandemic by the WHO on March 11, 2020. The 2019 n-CoV is a virus that is known to belong to a large family of coronaviruses which have affected the human kind in the past also like; SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV. As of today, April 12 2020, there are 1.78 million total Coronavirus Cases, 108,880 deaths and 404,581 recovered cases. Public health experts worry that the spread of COVID-19 could be worsened by misinformation. It is important to analyze the information available on the internet in regard to COVID-19. OBJECTIVE To evaluate quality of COVID-19 related health information over the internet using DISCERN tool. METHODS 100 URLs were generated by search engine Google in March 2020 by selecting the first 20 websites that appeared in the results of various keyword search. The keywords used in this search included “Coronavirus”, “Coronavirus causes”, “Coronavirus diagnosis”, “Coronavirus prevention” and “Coronavirus management”. The 16 item DISCERN tool was used to evaluate the quality of COVID-19 related information available on internet. Inter-rater reliability agreement was calculated using kappa statistics. RESULTS Results showed variation in how the raters assigned scores to different website categories. The lowest scores were received by .com websites. Results showed that .edu and .org, website category sites were excellent in communicating novel coronavirus related health information; however, they received lower scores for treatment effect and treatment choices. CONCLUSIONS The critical gaps in the available quality of information were assessed in context to COVID-19 and help us to evaluate the quality of information available and can guide the users to choose between various websites. If inaccurate information is being spread, that site should be closed down or some regulatory provisions should also be framed in this regard. One recommendation could be that websites, once ranked with trust marks, can be popularized to public for better information dissemination.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document