Literature DB >> 24583736

Cauda equina syndrome: assessing the readability and quality of patient information on the Internet.

Shane Ciaran O'Neill1, Joseph Frederick Baker, Conall Fitzgerald, Christina Fleming, Fiachra Rowan, Damien Byrne, Keith Synnott.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A readability and quality control Internet-based study using recognized quality scoring systems.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the readability and quality of Internet information relating to cauda equina syndrome accessed through common search engines. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Access to health-related Internet information has increased dramatically during the past decade. A significant proportion of this information has been demonstrated to be set at too high a level for general comprehension. Despite this, searching for health-related information is now the third most popular online activity.
METHODS: A total of 125 cauda equina syndrome Web sites were analyzed from the 5 most popular Internet search engines: Google, Bing, Yahoo, Ask, and AOL. Web site authorship was classified: academic, physician, medico-legal, commercial, or discussion/social media. Readability of each Web site was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease score, the Flesch-Kincaid grade level, and the Gunning Fog Index. Quality was calculated using the DISCERN instrument and The Journal of the American Medical Association benchmark criteria. The presence of HON-code certification was also assessed.
RESULTS: Fifty-two individual Web sites were identified and assessed. The majority of Web sites were academic or physician compiled (53.8%; 28/52); however, a significant minority of Web sites were medico-legal related (19.2%; 10/52). Just 13.5% (7/52) of Web sites were at or below the recommended sixth-grade readability level. HON-code certified Web sites achieved significantly greater DISCERN (P = 0.0006) and The Journal of the American Medical Association (P = 0.0002) scores.
CONCLUSION: Internet information relating to cauda equina syndrome is of variable quality and largely set at an inappropriate readability level. Given this variability in quality, health care providers should direct patients to known sources of reliable, readable online information. Identification of reliable sources may be aided by known markers of quality such as HON-code certification.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24583736     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000282

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  13 in total

1.  Obstetric anal sphincter injury: a systematic review of information available on the internet.

Authors:  Vishalli Ghai; Vasilios Pergialiotis; Haider Jan; James M N Duffy; Stergios K Doumouchtsis
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-08-29       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Comparison of the accuracy of CBCT effective radiation dose information in peer-reviewed journals and dental media.

Authors:  Diana Hicks; Michael Melkers; Julie Barna; Kimberley R Isett; Gregg H Gilbert
Journal:  Gen Dent       Date:  2019 May-Jun

3.  A Quality Assessment of the Information Accessible to Patients on the Internet About the Whipple Procedure.

Authors:  Hussein H Khachfe; Mohamad A Chahrour; Joseph R Habib; Jun Yu; Faek R Jamali
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2021-02-12       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Patient-focused websites related to stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse: a DISCERN quality analysis.

Authors:  Omar Felipe Dueñas-Garcia; Padmasini Kandadai; Michael K Flynn; Danielle Patterson; Jyot Saini; Katharine O'Dell
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-01-13       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Evaluation of the Reliability, Utility, and Quality of the Information in Sleeve Gastrectomy Videos Shared on Open Access Video Sharing Platform YouTube.

Authors:  Murat Ferhat Ferhatoglu; Abdulcabbar Kartal; Ugur Ekici; Alp Gurkan
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.129

6.  Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure: an assessment of the quality and readability of online information.

Authors:  Sean-Tee J M Lim; Martin Kelly; Logeswaran Selvarajah; Michael Murray; Timothy Scanlon
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2021-05-05       Impact factor: 2.796

7.  Assessment of the quality and readability of online information on autopsy for the general public: a cross-sectional analysis.

Authors:  Brian Hanley; Philip Brown; Shane O'Neill; Michael Osborn
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Readability and Quality of Online Information on Osteoarthritis: An Objective Analysis With Historic Comparison.

Authors:  Kieran Edward Murray; Timothy Eanna Murray; Anna Caroline O'Rourke; Candice Low; Douglas James Veale
Journal:  Interact J Med Res       Date:  2019-09-16

9.  Is quality of YouTube content on Bankart lesion and its surgical treatment adequate?

Authors:  Ahmet Onur Akpolat; Demet Pepele Kurdal
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 2.359

10.  The Quality and Readability of Information Available on the Internet Regarding Lumbar Fusion.

Authors:  Dafang Zhang; Charles Schumacher; Mitchel B Harris; Christopher M Bono
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2015-07-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.