OBJECTIVE: Patients are increasingly turning to the internet to seek reliable sources of health information and desire guidance in assessing the quality of information as healthcare becomes progressively more complex. Pituitary adenomas are a rare, diverse group of tumors associated with increased mortality and morbidity whose management requires a multidisciplinary approach. As such, patients with this disorder are often searching for additional sources of healthcare information. We undertook a study to assess the quality of information available on the internet for patients with pituitary adenoma. METHODS: After exclusion, 42 websites were identified based on a search engine query with various search terms. Each website was assessed in triplicate: once by a health professional, once by a simulated patient, and once by a patient who had a pituitary adenoma and underwent medical and surgical treatment. The assessment tools included a content-specific questionnaire, the DISCERN tool, and the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients tool. The readability of the information was assessed with the Flesch-Kincaid grade level. RESULTS: We found that the overall quality of information on pituitary adenoma on the internet was variable and written at a high grade level. Correlation between the different assessors was poor, indicating that there may be differences in how healthcare professionals and patients view healthcare information. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the importance of assessment of the health information by groups of the intended user to ensure the needs of that population are met. Abbreviation: EQIP = Ensuring Quality Information for Patients.
OBJECTIVE:Patients are increasingly turning to the internet to seek reliable sources of health information and desire guidance in assessing the quality of information as healthcare becomes progressively more complex. Pituitary adenomas are a rare, diverse group of tumors associated with increased mortality and morbidity whose management requires a multidisciplinary approach. As such, patients with this disorder are often searching for additional sources of healthcare information. We undertook a study to assess the quality of information available on the internet for patients with pituitary adenoma. METHODS: After exclusion, 42 websites were identified based on a search engine query with various search terms. Each website was assessed in triplicate: once by a health professional, once by a simulated patient, and once by a patient who had a pituitary adenoma and underwent medical and surgical treatment. The assessment tools included a content-specific questionnaire, the DISCERN tool, and the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients tool. The readability of the information was assessed with the Flesch-Kincaid grade level. RESULTS: We found that the overall quality of information on pituitary adenoma on the internet was variable and written at a high grade level. Correlation between the different assessors was poor, indicating that there may be differences in how healthcare professionals and patients view healthcare information. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the importance of assessment of the health information by groups of the intended user to ensure the needs of that population are met. Abbreviation: EQIP = Ensuring Quality Information for Patients.