Nicole Grant1, Sylvia Rodger1, Tammy Hoffmann1,2. 1. School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Qld, Australia. 2. Centre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, Qld, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Internet is a frequently accessed source of information for parents of a child with autism. To help parents make informed decisions about treatment options, websites should contain accurate information. This study aimed to evaluate the quality of information in a sample of autism-relevant websites. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Autism-related keywords were entered into three widely used search engines in April 2013 and the 20 most frequently appearing sites identified. Website quality was rated, by two independent raters, using the DISCERN tool. Websites were also coded according to the type of references/sources provided to support the intervention content presented. RESULTS: The mean DISCERN score was 46.5 (range 23-67.5), of a possible 80. Information about treatment risks and no treatment as an option was rarely described. Only six (30%) websites provided research references when describing intervention options. CONCLUSIONS: Many websites did not meet criteria for quality health information and failed to cite evidence supporting described interventions. Implications of these findings are discussed.
BACKGROUND: The Internet is a frequently accessed source of information for parents of a child with autism. To help parents make informed decisions about treatment options, websites should contain accurate information. This study aimed to evaluate the quality of information in a sample of autism-relevant websites. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Autism-related keywords were entered into three widely used search engines in April 2013 and the 20 most frequently appearing sites identified. Website quality was rated, by two independent raters, using the DISCERN tool. Websites were also coded according to the type of references/sources provided to support the intervention content presented. RESULTS: The mean DISCERN score was 46.5 (range 23-67.5), of a possible 80. Information about treatment risks and no treatment as an option was rarely described. Only six (30%) websites provided research references when describing intervention options. CONCLUSIONS: Many websites did not meet criteria for quality health information and failed to cite evidence supporting described interventions. Implications of these findings are discussed.
Authors: Irene Lacruz-Pérez; Pilar Sanz-Cervera; Gemma Pastor-Cerezuela; Irene Gómez-Marí; Raúl Tárraga-Mínguez Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-28 Impact factor: 3.390