Do quality markers for health websites affect the perception of vaccination webpages?

Searching for Social Media Addiction: A Content Analysis of Top Websites Found through Online Search Engines

Disordered social media use, often referred to as “social media addiction”, has not been officially recognized by medical bodies such as the American Psychiatric Association or the World Health Organization. However, websites still present information to laypeople on how to treat and manage social media addiction, which can pose the risk of spreading low quality or incorrect information. As such, we aimed to assess how the most popular social media addiction websites present information across multiple metrics. We conducted an in-depth online search to identify the top social media addiction websites in November 2019 (N = 23). Websites were separated into four distinct classifications: (1) treatment/therapy/medical; (2) informational; (3) news article; and (4) blog/essay. Based on previous website analysis research, three trained coders evaluated these websites on six metrics: (1) design; (2) credibility; (3) accessibility; (4) literacy; (5) engagement; and (6) social media addiction content. Design features were the top-rated metric across all websites, followed by credibility. Websites scored the lowest for the engagement and social media addiction content metrics. Across website classifications, scores for social media addiction content varied greatly, with blog/essay websites ranking the lowest and informational websites ranking the highest. Our findings provide necessary information for both patients and healthcare providers, apprising these individuals and the field about the current online health information landscape for disordered social media use.

Why Do Users of Online Mental Health Communities Get Likes and Reposts: A Combination of Text Mining and Empirical Analysis

An online community is one of the important ways for people with mental disorders to receive assistance and obtain support. This study aims to help users with mental disorders to obtain more support and communication through online communities, and to provide community managers with the possible influence mechanisms based on the information adoption model. We obtained a total of 49,047 posts of an online mental health communities in China, over a 40-day period. Then we used a combination of text mining and empirical analysis. Topic and sentiment analysis were used to derive the key variables—the topic of posts that the users care about most, and the emotion scores contained in posts. We then constructed a theoretical model based on the information adoption model. As core independent variables of information quality, on online mental health communities, the topic of social experience in posts (0.368 ***), the topic of emotional expression (0.353 ***), and the sentiment contained in the text (0.002 *) all had significant positive relationships with the number of likes and reposts. This study found that the users of online mental health communities are more attentive to the topics of social experience and emotional expressions, while they also care about the non-linguistic information. This study highlights the importance of helping community users to post on community-related topics, and gives administrators possible ways to help users gain the communication and support they need.

Factors Associated With Perceived Trust of False Abortion Websites: Cross-sectional Online Survey

Background

Most patients use the internet to search for health information. While there is a vast repository of searchable information online, much of the content is unregulated and therefore potentially incorrect, conflicting, or confusing. Abortion information online is particularly prone to being inaccurate as antichoice websites publish purposefully misleading information in formats that appear as neutral resources. To understand how antichoice websites appear neutral, we need to understand the specific website features of antichoice websites that impart an impression of trustworthiness.

Objective

We sought to identify the characteristics of false or misleading abortion websites that make these websites appear trustworthy to the public.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform. We used validated questionnaires to ask participants to rate 11 antichoice websites and one neutral website identified by experts, focusing on website content, creators, and design. We collected sociodemographic data and participant views on abortion. We used a composite measure of “mean overall trust” as our primary outcome. Using correlation matrices, we determined which website characteristics were most associated with mean overall trust. Finally, we used linear regression to identify participant characteristics associated with overall trust.

Results

Our analytic sample included 498 participants aged from 22 to 70 years, and 50.1% (247/493) identified as female. Across 11 antichoice websites, creator confidence (“I believe that the creators of this website are honest and trustworthy”) had the highest correlation coefficient (strongest relationship) with mean overall trust (coefficient=0.70). Professional appearance (coefficient=0.59), look and feel (coefficient=0.59), perception that the information is created by experts (coefficient=0.59), association with a trustworthy organization (coefficient=0.58), valued features and functionalities (coefficient=0.54), and interactive capabilities (coefficient=0.52) all demonstrated strong relationships with mean overall trust. At the individual level, prochoice leaning was associated with higher overall trust of the neutral website (B=−0.43, 95% CI −0.87 to 0.01) and lower mean overall trust of the antichoice websites (B=0.52, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.99).

Conclusions

The mean overall trust of antichoice websites is most associated with design characteristics and perceived trustworthiness of website creators. Those who believe that access to abortion should be limited are more likely to have higher mean overall trust for antichoice websites.

Evaluating the most popular diabetes websites in the USA: a content analysis

Over 1.5 million Americans are diagnosed with diabetes every year, and the majority of them go online to learn about their condition. Unfortunately, the online diabetes landscape is crowded, and the quality of website content is unknown-guidance for patients and healthcare providers regarding online diabetes information is needed. To address this, nine of the top diabetes websites in the USA were identified through a comprehensive, multiple-query search and a content analysis was conducted. Two coders, with high inter-coder reliability, evaluated these websites on six factors: (i) Design; (ii) Credibility; (iii) Accessibility; (iv) Literacy; (v) Engagement; and (vi) Diabetes Content. The analysis revealed that the websites presented most of the assessed design features. Few of the sites scored well on the credibility assessment, while the majority of sites did not note an author, editor or reviewer. With regard to accessibility, less than half of the items we assessed were met. Furthermore, the websites possessed wide variability in literacy, with an average readability grade level of 8.8. Most of the websites fared well in engagement, demonstrating multiple avenues to interact with the organization. All of the websites provided basic information regarding diabetes, but many did not include information for caregivers, providers or insurance information. In conclusion, patients and their family members will continue to seek online information about diabetes, its effects and treatment options. Therefore, this multiple-metric evaluation provides essential information for these individuals, and healthcare providers, who can now give better informed website recommendations to their patients and families.

Consumer Evaluation of the Quality of Online Health Information: Systematic Literature Review of Relevant Criteria and Indicators

Background

As the quality of online health information remains questionable, there is a pressing need to understand how consumers evaluate this information. Past reviews identified content-, source-, and individual-related factors that influence consumer judgment in this area. However, systematic knowledge concerning the evaluation process, that is, why and how these factors influence the evaluation behavior, is lacking.

Objective

This review aims (1) to identify criteria (rules that reflect notions of value and worth) that consumers use to evaluate the quality of online health information and the indicators (properties of information objects to which criteria are applied to form judgments) they use to support the evaluation in order to achieve a better understanding of the process of information quality evaluation and (2) to explicate the relationship between indicators and criteria to provide clear guidelines for designers of consumer health information systems.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed in seven digital reference databases including Medicine, Psychology, Communication, and Library and Information Science to identify empirical studies that report how consumers directly and explicitly describe their evaluation of online health information quality. Thirty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria. A qualitative content analysis was performed to identify quality evaluation criteria, indicators, and their relationships.

Results

We identified 25 criteria and 165 indicators. The most widely reported criteria used by consumers were trustworthiness, expertise, and objectivity. The indicators were related to source, content, and design. Among them, 114 were positive indicators (entailing positive quality judgments), 35 were negative indicators (entailing negative judgments), and 16 indicators had both positive and negative quality influence, depending on contextual factors (eg, source and individual differences) and criteria applied. The most widely reported indicators were site owners/sponsors; consensus among multiple sources; characteristics of writing and language; advertisements; content authorship; and interface design.

Conclusions

Consumer evaluation of online health information is a complex cost-benefit analysis process that involves the use of a wide range of criteria and a much wider range of quality indicators. There are commonalities in the use of criteria across user groups and source types, but the differences are hard to ignore. Evidently, consumers’ health information evaluation can be characterized as highly subjective and contextualized, and sometimes, misinformed. These findings invite more research into how different user groups evaluate different types of online sources and a personalized approach to educate users about evaluating online health information quality.

Learning to parent from Google? Evaluation of available online health evidence for parents of preterm infants requiring neonatal intensive care

The study aim was to identify and evaluate the reliability and quality of online resources for parents of preterm infants seeking health information about their infant using the DISCERN tool and Health on Net code. An Internet search ( www.google.com ) was used to identify websites for parents of preterm infants on their infants' health and health issues. For each search, the top 100 "hits" were downloaded, yielding 1200 websites. After reviewing websites for exclusion criteria and duplicates, 197 websites remained and were analyzed. According to the DISCERN tool, the websites had a moderate reliability score (mean = 29.88, standard deviation = 4.88, range: 18-40), moderate treatment score (mean = 24.15, standard deviation = 5.79, range: 10-35), and moderate overall quality score (mean = 3.41, standard deviation = 0.89, range: 1-5). Only 24 (12.2%) websites had current Health on Net code approval and no other websites met full eligibility for certification. Overall, the reliability and quality of information available online to parents of preterm infants is lacking.