PURPOSE: The Internet is widely used by patients to source health care-related information. We sought to analyse the quality of information available on the Internet about uterine artery embolization (UAE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched three major search engines for the phrase "uterine artery embolization" and compiled the top 50 results from each engine. After excluding repeated sites, scientific articles, and links to documents, the remaining 50 sites were assessed using the LIDA instrument, which scores sites across the domains of accessibility, usability, and reliability. The Fleisch reading ease score (FRES) was calculated for each of the sites. Finally, we checked the country of origin and the presence of certification by the Health On the Net Foundation (HONcode) as well as their effect on LIDA and FRES scores. RESULTS: The following mean scores were obtained: accessibility 48/60 (80%), usability 42/54 (77%), reliability 20/51 (39%), total LIDA 110/165 (67%), and FRES 42/100 (42%). Nine sites had HONcode certification, and this was associated with significantly greater (p < 0.05) reliability and total LIDA and FRES scores. When comparing sites between United Kingdom and United States, there was marked variation in the quality of results obtained when searching for information on UAE (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In general, sites were well designed and easy to use. However, many scored poorly on the reliability of their information either because they were produced in a non-evidence-based way or because they lacking currency. It is important that patients are guided to reputable, location-specific sources of information online, especially because prominent search engine rank does not guarantee reliability of information.
PURPOSE: The Internet is widely used by patients to source health care-related information. We sought to analyse the quality of information available on the Internet about uterine artery embolization (UAE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched three major search engines for the phrase "uterine artery embolization" and compiled the top 50 results from each engine. After excluding repeated sites, scientific articles, and links to documents, the remaining 50 sites were assessed using the LIDA instrument, which scores sites across the domains of accessibility, usability, and reliability. The Fleisch reading ease score (FRES) was calculated for each of the sites. Finally, we checked the country of origin and the presence of certification by the Health On the Net Foundation (HONcode) as well as their effect on LIDA and FRES scores. RESULTS: The following mean scores were obtained: accessibility 48/60 (80%), usability 42/54 (77%), reliability 20/51 (39%), total LIDA 110/165 (67%), and FRES 42/100 (42%). Nine sites had HONcode certification, and this was associated with significantly greater (p < 0.05) reliability and total LIDA and FRES scores. When comparing sites between United Kingdom and United States, there was marked variation in the quality of results obtained when searching for information on UAE (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In general, sites were well designed and easy to use. However, many scored poorly on the reliability of their information either because they were produced in a non-evidence-based way or because they lacking currency. It is important that patients are guided to reputable, location-specific sources of information online, especially because prominent search engine rank does not guarantee reliability of information.
Authors: M W Alsem; K M van Meeteren; M Verhoef; M J W M Schmitz; M J Jongmans; J M A Meily-Visser; M Ketelaar Journal: Res Involv Engagem Date: 2017-12-11
Authors: Stephanie Jane Clunne; Brooke Jade Ryan; Annie Jane Hill; Caitlin Brandenburg; Ian Kneebone Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2018-12-04 Impact factor: 5.428