BACKGROUND: Asplenic patients in general have poor knowledge about their condition. Patients are increasingly turning to the Internet for their health care information, therefore this is a resource that many asplenic patients will use. The aim of our study was to determine the quality of information on the Internet for asplenic patients. METHODS: We identified websites by entering "splenectomy OR spleen removal" into 3 Internet search engines on July 28, 2008. The top 50 English-language websites from each search engine were included in our analysis. We evaluated the websites with our own 21-point content scale as well as 4 commonly used quality-assessment tools. All websites were analyzed independently by 2 reviewers. Correlations were made between the quality assessment instruments, content, readability and target audience. RESULTS: We included 89 websites in the study. The mean content score percentage for all websites was 49% (95% confidence interval 44%-54%). The long-term risk of infection was mentioned in 84% of websites, and the need for vaccination was mentioned in 79%. The mean quality assessment tool score was 61%, and the mean reading grade level was 11. CONCLUSION: Whereas websites on average did not cover most of the information that asplenic patients should receive, the long-term risk of serious infection and the need for vaccination was consistently mentioned. Websites were inconsistent with respect to adhering to standards advocated by the quality assessment instruments we used, and the mean reading grade level was far above what is recommended for patient literature.
BACKGROUND: Asplenic patients in general have poor knowledge about their condition. Patients are increasingly turning to the Internet for their health care information, therefore this is a resource that many asplenic patients will use. The aim of our study was to determine the quality of information on the Internet for asplenic patients. METHODS: We identified websites by entering "splenectomy OR spleen removal" into 3 Internet search engines on July 28, 2008. The top 50 English-language websites from each search engine were included in our analysis. We evaluated the websites with our own 21-point content scale as well as 4 commonly used quality-assessment tools. All websites were analyzed independently by 2 reviewers. Correlations were made between the quality assessment instruments, content, readability and target audience. RESULTS: We included 89 websites in the study. The mean content score percentage for all websites was 49% (95% confidence interval 44%-54%). The long-term risk of infection was mentioned in 84% of websites, and the need for vaccination was mentioned in 79%. The mean quality assessment tool score was 61%, and the mean reading grade level was 11. CONCLUSION: Whereas websites on average did not cover most of the information that asplenic patients should receive, the long-term risk of serious infection and the need for vaccination was consistently mentioned. Websites were inconsistent with respect to adhering to standards advocated by the quality assessment instruments we used, and the mean reading grade level was far above what is recommended for patient literature.
Authors: Funda Meric; Elmer V Bernstam; Nadeem Q Mirza; Kelly K Hunt; Frederick C Ames; Merrick I Ross; Henry M Kuerer; Raphael E Pollock; Mark A Musen; S Eva Singletary Journal: BMJ Date: 2002-03-09
Authors: Stephanie Mallow Corbett; Jill A Rebuck; Frederick B Rogers; Peter Callas; Gene Grindlinger; Steven Desjardins; James C Hebert Journal: J Trauma Date: 2007-02
Authors: Michelle Smekal; Sarah Gil; Maoliosa Donald; Heather Beanlands; Sharon Straus; Gwen Herrington; Dwight Sparkes; Lori Harwood; Allison Tong; Allan Grill; Karen Tu; Blair Waldvogel; Chantel Large; Claire Large; Marta Novak; Matthew James; Meghan Elliott; Maria Delgado; Scott Brimble; Susan Samuel; Brenda R Hemmelgarn Journal: Can J Kidney Health Dis Date: 2019-07-30