Hussein H Khachfe1, Mohamad A Chahrour2, Joseph R Habib3, Jun Yu3, Faek R Jamali4. 1. Faculty of Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon. hhk15@mail.aub.edu. 2. Faculty of Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon. 3. Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, Sheikh Shakhbout Medical City, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Internet has become a central source of information on health-related issues. The aim of this study is to assess the quality and readability of online information present on the Whipple surgical procedure by applying recognized scoring tools. METHODS: A search using the top three online search engines (Google, Bing and Yahoo) was conducted in July 2020. Websites were classified as academic, physician, commercial or unspecified. The quality of information was assessed using the JAMA and DISCERN assessment instruments and presence of a HONcode seal. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES). RESULTS: A total of 34 unique sources were included in our study. The average JAMA and DISCERN scores of all websites were 2.22 ± 0.48 and 47.28 ± 1.17, respectively, with a median of 1.9 (range 0-4) and 47 (range 18-71), respectively. Website classification distribution was 38% academic, 18% commercial, 9% unspecified, and 1% from physician-based websites. Physician websites had the highest JAMA score with a mean of 3 ± 0.46. Unspecified websites had the highest DISCERN score with a mean of 54.60 ± 1.09. Only 3 websites had the HONcode seal. Physician websites had a significantly higher JAMA mean score than academic websites (p-value = 0.004). Readability was difficult and is on the level of university students. CONCLUSION: The results of this study show a poor quality of online information present on the Whipple surgery. Academic and physician websites need to improve the quality of their websites on the procedure. More HONcode-certified websites are needed as they are the best source for information on this operation.
BACKGROUND: The Internet has become a central source of information on health-related issues. The aim of this study is to assess the quality and readability of online information present on the Whipple surgical procedure by applying recognized scoring tools. METHODS: A search using the top three online search engines (Google, Bing and Yahoo) was conducted in July 2020. Websites were classified as academic, physician, commercial or unspecified. The quality of information was assessed using the JAMA and DISCERN assessment instruments and presence of a HONcode seal. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES). RESULTS: A total of 34 unique sources were included in our study. The average JAMA and DISCERN scores of all websites were 2.22 ± 0.48 and 47.28 ± 1.17, respectively, with a median of 1.9 (range 0-4) and 47 (range 18-71), respectively. Website classification distribution was 38% academic, 18% commercial, 9% unspecified, and 1% from physician-based websites. Physician websites had the highest JAMA score with a mean of 3 ± 0.46. Unspecified websites had the highest DISCERN score with a mean of 54.60 ± 1.09. Only 3 websites had the HONcode seal. Physician websites had a significantly higher JAMA mean score than academic websites (p-value = 0.004). Readability was difficult and is on the level of university students. CONCLUSION: The results of this study show a poor quality of online information present on the Whipple surgery. Academic and physician websites need to improve the quality of their websites on the procedure. More HONcode-certified websites are needed as they are the best source for information on this operation.
Authors: Thierry Conroy; Pascal Hammel; Mohamed Hebbar; Meher Ben Abdelghani; Alice C Wei; Jean-Luc Raoul; Laurence Choné; Eric Francois; Pascal Artru; James J Biagi; Thierry Lecomte; Eric Assenat; Roger Faroux; Marc Ychou; Julien Volet; Alain Sauvanet; Gilles Breysacher; Frédéric Di Fiore; Christine Cripps; Petr Kavan; Patrick Texereau; Karine Bouhier-Leporrier; Faiza Khemissa-Akouz; Jean-Louis Legoux; Béata Juzyna; Sophie Gourgou; Christopher J O'Callaghan; Claire Jouffroy-Zeller; Patrick Rat; David Malka; Florence Castan; Jean-Baptiste Bachet Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-12-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Lola Rahib; Benjamin D Smith; Rhonda Aizenberg; Allison B Rosenzweig; Julie M Fleshman; Lynn M Matrisian Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2014-06-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Mohamed Abdelgadir Adam; Kingshuk Choudhury; Michaela A Dinan; Shelby D Reed; Randall P Scheri; Dan G Blazer; Sanziana A Roman; Julie A Sosa Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Elizabeth Murray; Bernard Lo; Lance Pollack; Karen Donelan; Joe Catania; Ken Lee; Kinga Zapert; Rachel Turner Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2003-08-29 Impact factor: 5.428