scholarly journals Quality and readability of web-based Arabic health information on COVID-19: Infodemiology study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esam Halboub ◽  
Mohammed Sultan Al-Akhali ◽  
Hesham M Al-Mekhlafi ◽  
Mohammed Nasser Alhajj
Keyword(s):  
American Medical Association ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Grade Level ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
Grade Levels ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Web

Abstract Objective: The study sought to assess the quality and readability of the web-based Arabic health information on COVID-19. Methods: Selected search engines were searched on 13 April 2020 for specific Arabic terms on COVID-19. The first 100 consecutive websites from each engine were obtained. The quality of the websites was analyzed using the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode), the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, and the DISCERN benchmarks instrument. The readability was assessed using an online readability calculator tool. Results: Overall, 36 websites were found eligible for quality and readability analyses. Only one website (2.7%) was HONcode certified. No single website attained a high score based on the DISCERN tool; the mean score of all websites was 31.5±12.55. Regarding JAMA benchmarks, a mean score of 2.08±1.05 was achieved by the websites; however, only 4 (11.1%) websites achieved all JAMA criteria. The average grade levels for readability were 7.2±7.5, 3.3±0.6 and 93.5±19.4 for Flesch Kincaid Grade level, SMOG, Flesch Reading Ease, respectively. Conclusion: Most of the available web-based Arabic health information on COVID-19 doesn’t have the required level of quality, irrespective of being easy to read and understand by most of the general people.

scholarly journals Quality and readability of web-based Arabic health information on COVID-19: an infodemiological study

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Esam Halboub ◽  
Mohammed Sultan Al-Ak’hali ◽  
Hesham M. Al-Mekhlafi ◽  
Mohammed Nasser Alhajj
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Grade Level ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
Arabic Speakers ◽  
Grade Levels ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Quality Assessments

Abstract Background This study sought to assess the quality and readability of web-based Arabic health information on COVID-19. Methods Three search engines were searched on 13 April 2020 for specific Arabic terms on COVID-19. The first 100 consecutive websites from each engine were analyzed for eligibility, which resulted in a sample of 36 websites. These websites were subjected to quality assessments using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks tool, the DISCERN tool, and Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode) certification. The readability of the websites was assessed using an online readability calculator. Results Among the 36 eligible websites, only one (2.7%) was HONcode certified. No website attained a high score based on the criteria of the DISCERN tool; the mean score of all websites was 31.5 ± 12.55. As regards the JAMA benchmarks results, a mean score of 2.08 ± 1.05 was achieved by the websites; however, only four (11.1%) met all the JAMA criteria. The average grade levels for readability were 7.2 ± 7.5, 3.3 ± 0.6 and 93.5 ± 19.4 for the Flesch Kincaid Grade Level, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, and Flesch Reading Ease scales, respectively. Conclusion Almost all of the most easily accessible web-based Arabic health information on COVID-19 does not meet recognized quality standards regardless of the level of readability and ability to be understood by the general population of Arabic speakers.

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.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Quality and Readability of Health Information Websites Identified through India’s Major Search Engines

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Raj ◽  
V. L. Sharma ◽  
A. J. Singh ◽  
S. Goel
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
Grade Level ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Sixth Grade ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
Ease Score ◽  
The Mean

Background. The available health information on websites should be reliable and accurate in order to make informed decisions by community. This study was done to assess the quality and readability of health information websites on World Wide Web in India.Methods. This cross-sectional study was carried out in June 2014. The key words “Health” and “Information” were used on search engines “Google” and “Yahoo.” Out of 50 websites (25 from each search engines), after exclusion, 32 websites were evaluated. LIDA tool was used to assess the quality whereas the readability was assessed using Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), and SMOG.Results. Forty percent of websites (n=13) were sponsored by government. Health On the Net Code of Conduct (HONcode) certification was present on 50% (n=16) of websites. The mean LIDA score (74.31) was average. Only 3 websites scored high on LIDA score. Only five had readability scores at recommended sixth-grade level.Conclusion. Most health information websites had average quality especially in terms of usability and reliability and were written at high readability levels. Efforts are needed to develop the health information websites which can help general population in informed decision making.

scholarly journals A credibility assessment of online breast cancer information

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Abarca-Cuming
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Rapid Expansion ◽  
Cancer Information ◽  
Digital Environment ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Written Information ◽  
Health Market

The rapid expansion of the Internet and changes in the health market are giving rise to the emergence of web-based tools for seeking health information. As a result, the Web empowers consumers by allowing them to access important medical information that has traditionally been mediated through healthcare professionals. Along with this growing trend comes the challenge of establishing credibility in a digital environment saturated with health information. One way to begin addressing this challenge is to assess the projection of credibility of health information found online. The purpose of this paper is twofold. Firstly, to develop a better understanding of how projections of credibility might differ between traditional and non-traditional online health sources. The former defined as websites belonging to formal and conventional institutions and the latter defined as informal and unconventional organizations. Secondly, to develop some strategic approaches that might be employed to enhance perceptions of online credibility. This paper conducts a content analysis using the Health on the Net Foundation’s Code of Conduct for medical and health websites and DISCERN, an instrument that assesses the quality of written information about treatment choices (DISCERN, 2012).

Quality of Websites about Long-Acting Reversible Contraception (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catrin Eriksson ◽  
Matilda Skinstad ◽  
Susanne Georgsson ◽  
Tommy Carlsson
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Treatment Choices ◽  
Unintended Pregnancies ◽  
Sources Of Support ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Long Acting ◽  
Swedish Patient ◽  
The Web

BACKGROUND Long-acting reversible contraception are recommended for those who wish to prevent unintended pregnancies. Use of the Web for information about contraception is widespread, but there is a risk that patients come in contact with sources of low quality. OBJECTIVE The overarching aim was to investigate the quality of websites about long-acting reversible contraception. METHODS Swedish patient-oriented websites were identified through searches in Google (n=46 included websites). Reliability and information about treatment choices was assessed by two assessors with the DISCERN instrument, transparency was analyzed with the Journal of the Medical Association benchmarks, completeness was assessed with content analysis, and readability was analyzed with Readability Index. RESULTS The mean DISCERN was 44.1 (SD 7.7) for total score, 19.7 (SD 3.7) for reliability, 22.1 (SD 4.1) for information about treatment choices, and 2.3 (SD 1.1) for overall quality. A majority of the included websites had low quality concerning if it included information when the information was produced (87%), if it was clear which sources that were used to compile the publication (78%), and if it provided additional sources of support and information (66%). Less than half of the websites adhered to any of the JAMA benchmarks. We identified 23 categories of comprehensiveness. The most frequent was treatment mechanism, which was covered by 39 (85%) websites. The least frequent was when treatment may be initiated following an abortion, which was covered by 3 (7%) websites. Mean Readability Index was 42.5 (SD 6.3, Range 29-55) indicating moderate or difficult readability levels. CONCLUSIONS The quality of patient-oriented websites about long-acting reversible contraception is poor. There is an undeniable need to support and guide laypersons that intend to use web-based sources about contraceptive alternatives, so that they may reach informed decisions based on sufficient knowledge.

scholarly journals Readability and Comprehensibility of Patient Information Leaflets for Antidiabetic Medications in Qatar

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 128-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emad Eldin Munsour ◽  
Ahmed Awaisu ◽  
Mohamed Azmi Ahmad Hassali ◽  
Sara Darwish ◽  
Einas Abdoun
Keyword(s):  
Patient Information ◽  
Grade Level ◽  
Literacy Skills ◽  
English Only ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
Patient Information Leaflets ◽  
Grade Levels ◽  
Information Leaflets ◽  
Health Related ◽  
The Mean

Background:The readability and comprehensibility of the patient information leaflets (PILs) provided with antidiabetic medications are of questionable standards; this issue negatively affects adherence to drug therapy, especially in patients with limited literacy skills. Objective: To evaluate the readability and comprehensibility of PILs supplied with medications used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Qatar. Methods: All PILs of the antidiabetic medications in Qatar were evaluated using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score for readability. The Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Gunning-Fog Index, and SMOG Grading were used to estimate the comprehensibility of PILs in terms of school grade levels. Results: A total of 45 PILs were evaluated: 32 (71.1%) PILs of brand-name products and 13 (28.9%) for generics. Nine (20%) of the PILs were in English only; 8 (17.8%) were in English, Arabic, and French; and 28 (62.2%) were in English and Arabic. The mean FRE score was 37.71 (±15.85), and the most readable PIL had FRE score of 62. The mean scores for the comprehensibility evaluations were 10.96 (±2.67), 15.02 (±2.52), and 11.41 (±1.6) for the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Gunning-Fog Index, and SMOG Grading, respectively. The most commonly used antidiabetic medication was metformin with 1372.9 (±552.9) as PILs’ mean number of words. Conclusion: Only 2.2% of PILs had acceptable readability scores. All PILs could be comprehended by at least an 11th grade student, which exceeds the recommended grade level for health-related materials. Approximately 20% of these PILs were in English only and were not readable by most patients.

scholarly journals Readability and Quality of Online Information on Osteoarthritis: An Objective Analysis With Historic Comparison (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kieran Edward Murray ◽  
Timothy Eanna Murray ◽  
Anna Caroline O'Rourke ◽  
Candice Low ◽  
Douglas James Veale
Keyword(s):  
Grade Level ◽  
English Language ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
12Th Grade ◽  
8Th Grade ◽  
Ease Score

BACKGROUND Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common cause of disability in people older than 65 years. Readability of online OA information has never been assessed. A 2003 study found the quality of online OA information to be poor. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to review the readability and quality of current online information regarding OA. METHODS The term osteoarthritis was searched across the three most popular English language search engines. The first 25 pages from each search engine were analyzed. Duplicate pages, websites featuring paid advertisements, inaccessible pages (behind a pay wall, not available for geographical reasons), and nontext pages were excluded. Readability was measured using Flesch Reading Ease Score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and Gunning-Fog Index. Website quality was scored using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria and the DISCERN criteria. Presence or absence of the Health On the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode) certification, age of content, content producer, and author characteristics were noted. RESULTS A total of 37 unique websites were found suitable for analysis. Readability varied by assessment tool from 8th to 12th grade level. This compares with the recommended 7th to 8th grade level. Of the 37, 1 (2.7%) website met all 4 JAMA criteria. Mean DISCERN quality of information for OA websites was “fair,” compared with the “poor” grading of a 2003 study. HONcode-endorsed websites (43%, 16/37) were of a statistically significant higher quality. CONCLUSIONS Readability of online health information for OA was either equal to or more difficult than the recommended level.

scholarly journals Evaluating the Quality and Readability of Online Resources for Covid-19 in Pregnancy: An Assessment of Web Based Information (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Owens ◽  
Catherine Ford ◽  
Lopa Pandya
Keyword(s):  
Grade Level ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Kappa Statistic ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Grade Levels ◽  
Reading Grade Level ◽  
Website Content ◽  
In Pregnancy

BACKGROUND The internet is a source for inquiries and a way to distribute information. Pregnant women may look to the internet for information about COVID-19’s impact on pregnancy. As providers, it’s vital to provide patients with information that is both reliable and comprehendible. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the readability and quality of web-based information regarding Covid-19 in pregnancy. OBJECTIVE The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the quality, readability, and accuracy of web-based information regarding Covid-19 in pregnancy. METHODS The JAMA benchmark tool was used to evaluate the websites. Readability was assessed using Flesch-Kincaid reading ease and Flesch-Kincaid grade level. An interrater reliability analysis using the Kappa statistic was performed to determine consistency among raters. RESULTS The mean score using the JAMA tool was 3.53 (SD, 0.74). The majority of the websites came from news sites (37.8%). The median reading grade level was 11.9. The interrater reliability for the raters was found to be Kappa=0.363 (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Our study indicated that reliable information regarding Covid-19 in pregnancy was available online. An assessment of website content indicated that both grade levels and reading ease was higher than recommended. By guiding patients to reliable and accurate sources we can educate our patients while also guiding shared decision making.

scholarly journals Readability and Quality of Online Information on Osteoarthritis: An Objective Analysis With Historic Comparison

10.2196/12855 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. e12855 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kieran Edward Murray ◽  
Timothy Eanna Murray ◽  
Anna Caroline O'Rourke ◽  
Candice Low ◽  
Douglas James Veale
Keyword(s):  
Grade Level ◽  
English Language ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
12Th Grade ◽  
8Th Grade ◽  
Ease Score

Background Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common cause of disability in people older than 65 years. Readability of online OA information has never been assessed. A 2003 study found the quality of online OA information to be poor. Objective The aim of this study was to review the readability and quality of current online information regarding OA. Methods The term osteoarthritis was searched across the three most popular English language search engines. The first 25 pages from each search engine were analyzed. Duplicate pages, websites featuring paid advertisements, inaccessible pages (behind a pay wall, not available for geographical reasons), and nontext pages were excluded. Readability was measured using Flesch Reading Ease Score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and Gunning-Fog Index. Website quality was scored using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria and the DISCERN criteria. Presence or absence of the Health On the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode) certification, age of content, content producer, and author characteristics were noted. Results A total of 37 unique websites were found suitable for analysis. Readability varied by assessment tool from 8th to 12th grade level. This compares with the recommended 7th to 8th grade level. Of the 37, 1 (2.7%) website met all 4 JAMA criteria. Mean DISCERN quality of information for OA websites was “fair,” compared with the “poor” grading of a 2003 study. HONcode-endorsed websites (43%, 16/37) were of a statistically significant higher quality. Conclusions Readability of online health information for OA was either equal to or more difficult than the recommended level.

scholarly journals A credibility assessment of online breast cancer information

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Abarca-Cuming
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Rapid Expansion ◽  
Cancer Information ◽  
Digital Environment ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Written Information ◽  
Health Market

The rapid expansion of the Internet and changes in the health market are giving rise to the emergence of web-based tools for seeking health information. As a result, the Web empowers consumers by allowing them to access important medical information that has traditionally been mediated through healthcare professionals. Along with this growing trend comes the challenge of establishing credibility in a digital environment saturated with health information. One way to begin addressing this challenge is to assess the projection of credibility of health information found online. The purpose of this paper is twofold. Firstly, to develop a better understanding of how projections of credibility might differ between traditional and non-traditional online health sources. The former defined as websites belonging to formal and conventional institutions and the latter defined as informal and unconventional organizations. Secondly, to develop some strategic approaches that might be employed to enhance perceptions of online credibility. This paper conducts a content analysis using the Health on the Net Foundation’s Code of Conduct for medical and health websites and DISCERN, an instrument that assesses the quality of written information about treatment choices (DISCERN, 2012).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document