Literature DB >> 11470621

Clinical websites are currently dangerous to health.

J M Roberts1, K L Copeland.   

Abstract

The Internet is becoming a ubiquitous medium, open to all. The paper explores the reasons why current health-related websites require extensive review and investment to ensure that they address the full spectrum of the audiences who may access their site. The audiences are no longer purely local or even solely those who work in the health domain. They will include everyone, from professional healthcare practitioners to members of the general public. The site web masters should also consider the range of purposes for which these disparate groups access the site. The language, content intensity and presentation should have a different style and be identified by its intended audience to avoid a range of problems including mis-interpretation, mis-targetting of content, mis-representation of source and quality. Inappropriate content and presentation could jeopardise the credibility of health sites, and thus healthcare provision, with the newly emerging audiences. Recent studies involving the evaluation of many web sites have assessed their 'fitness for purpose' as information repositories for different audiences. The criteria by which clinically related web contents are judged will vary, depending on the type of visitor to the site. Formal qualification of web content is ongoing--addressing both structured definition [1] and quality criteria [2]. Originators of web material should consider the full spectrum of the audiences who may access their site, from professional healthcare practitioners to members of the general public, and the purposes for which they access the site. The language, content intensity and presentation should have a different style and be identified by its intended audience to avoid a range of problems including mis-interpretation, mis-targetting of content, mis-representation of source and quality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11470621     DOI: 10.1016/s1386-5056(01)00162-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Med Inform        ISSN: 1386-5056            Impact factor:   4.046


  6 in total

1.  Accuracy of information on apparently credible websites: survey of five common health topics.

Authors:  Heinke Kunst; Diederik Groot; Pallavi M Latthe; Manish Latthe; Khalid S Khan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-03-09

2.  Quality of health information on the Internet in pediatric neuro-oncology.

Authors:  Darren R Hargrave; Ursula A Hargrave; Eric Bouffet
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2006-03-02       Impact factor: 12.300

3.  The case for randomized controlled trials to assess the impact of clinical information systems.

Authors:  Joseph L Y Liu; Jeremy C Wyatt
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  Childhood brain tumour information on the Internet in the Chinese language.

Authors:  Loretta Lau; Darren R Hargrave; Ute Bartels; Carlos Esquembre; Eric Bouffet
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2005-11-10       Impact factor: 1.475

5.  Digesting the Contents: an Analysis of Online Colorectal Cancer Education Websites.

Authors:  Lisa Wang; Eva M Gusnowski; Paris-Ann Ingledew
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2020-09-09       Impact factor: 2.037

6.  The impact of search engine selection and sorting criteria on vaccination beliefs and attitudes: two experiments manipulating Google output.

Authors:  Ahmed Allam; Peter Johannes Schulz; Kent Nakamoto
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2014-04-02       Impact factor: 5.428

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.