Maria A Lopez-Olivo1, Jude K A des Bordes2, Maha N Syed3, Ahmed Alemam4, Abhinav Dodeja5, Noha Abdel-Wahab6,7,8, Maria E Suarez-Almazor9,6. 1. Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. amlopezo@mdanderson.org. 2. Department of Family and Community Medicine, The University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX, USA. 3. Department of General Internal Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Unit 437, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. 4. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, BronxCare Hospital Center, Bronx, NY, USA. 5. Division of Hospitalist Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. 6. Section of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Department of General Internal Medicine, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 7. Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 8. Rheumatology & Rehabilitation Department, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University Hospital, Assiut, Egypt. 9. Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE/ INTRODUCTION: Bone health education publicly available through the Internet, if evidence-based and unbiased, could help patients deal with issues such as decision-making, maintaining healthy lifestyles, using medications correctly, and improving their communication with health professionals. METHODS: We performed an environmental scan and quality assessment of the currently available osteoporosis and bone health patient education information on the World Wide Web. The sample websites were identified by using three separate search tools: Google Advanced, Bing, and Ask.com . Two independent investigators collected data and appraised the quality of selected websites. RESULTS: We identified 48 websites. Most websites were focused on risks factors of osteoporosis, preventive measures, screening recommendations, and topics to discuss with the physician. All websites provided adequate information describing treatment options; however, only 36% had information addressing duration of treatment, what happens when treatment stops, and the benefits and risks of various treatments. A total of 55% of the websites had their content updated to 2019 and 68% cited their sources of information to support their content. Reading levels ranged from 7.5 to 15.2 (higher than the recommended 6-grade level). CONCLUSIONS: Websites with information about bone health and osteoporosis commonly present information about initial treatment choices, but most fail to address risk-benefit issues, and common barriers than can occur throughout the course of the disease. In addition, many websites did not update their content, did not cite their sources of information, or were written at a 9-grade level or above (rendering them unsuitable for low-literacy populations).
PURPOSE/ INTRODUCTION: Bone health education publicly available through the Internet, if evidence-based and unbiased, could help patients deal with issues such as decision-making, maintaining healthy lifestyles, using medications correctly, and improving their communication with health professionals. METHODS: We performed an environmental scan and quality assessment of the currently available osteoporosis and bone health patient education information on the World Wide Web. The sample websites were identified by using three separate search tools: Google Advanced, Bing, and Ask.com . Two independent investigators collected data and appraised the quality of selected websites. RESULTS: We identified 48 websites. Most websites were focused on risks factors of osteoporosis, preventive measures, screening recommendations, and topics to discuss with the physician. All websites provided adequate information describing treatment options; however, only 36% had information addressing duration of treatment, what happens when treatment stops, and the benefits and risks of various treatments. A total of 55% of the websites had their content updated to 2019 and 68% cited their sources of information to support their content. Reading levels ranged from 7.5 to 15.2 (higher than the recommended 6-grade level). CONCLUSIONS: Websites with information about bone health and osteoporosis commonly present information about initial treatment choices, but most fail to address risk-benefit issues, and common barriers than can occur throughout the course of the disease. In addition, many websites did not update their content, did not cite their sources of information, or were written at a 9-grade level or above (rendering them unsuitable for low-literacy populations).
Authors: Bradford W Hesse; David E Nelson; Gary L Kreps; Robert T Croyle; Neeraj K Arora; Barbara K Rimer; Kasisomayajula Viswanath Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2005 Dec 12-26
Authors: Amir Qaseem; Mary Ann Forciea; Robert M McLean; Thomas D Denberg; Michael J Barry; Molly Cooke; Nick Fitterman; Russell P Harris; Linda L Humphrey; Devan Kansagara; Robert M McLean; Tanveer P Mir; Holger J Schünemann Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2017-05-09 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Harish Rajashekarappa Siddhanamatha; Eric Heung; Maria de Los Angeles Lopez-Olivo; Noha Abdel-Wahab; Ana Ojeda-Prias; Irmgard Willcockson; Amye Leong; Maria Eugenia Suarez-Almazor Journal: Semin Arthritis Rheum Date: 2017-01-18 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Pauline M Camacho; Steven M Petak; Neil Binkley; Bart L Clarke; Steven T Harris; Daniel L Hurley; Michael Kleerekoper; E Michael Lewiecki; Paul D Miller; Harmeet S Narula; Rachel Pessah-Pollack; Vin Tangpricha; Sunil J Wimalawansa; Nelson B Watts Journal: Endocr Pract Date: 2016-09-02 Impact factor: 3.443
Authors: Noha Abdel-Wahab; Devesh Rai; Harish Siddhanamatha; Abhinav Dodeja; Maria E Suarez-Almazor; Maria A Lopez-Olivo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-06-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Juan Ignacio Ruiz; Gagandeep Singh; McKenna Erck; Yimin Geng; Maria E Suarez-Almazor; Maria A Lopez-Olivo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-10-10 Impact factor: 3.752