Assessment of the quality of postherpetic neuralgia treatment information on the Internet

Info-pollution: a word of caution for the neurosurgical community

The medical-patient relationship is facing pollution of information all over the internet, for physician and patients is becoming tougher to keep updated with the highest quality of information. During the last 20 years multiple evaluation tools have been developed trying to find the best tool to assess high-quality information, to date DISCERN tool represents the most widely spread. Information can be found on the surface internet and in the deep web, constituting the biggest chunk of the internet, informing and controlling the quality of information is a formidable task. PubMed and Google Scholar are the most important tools for a physician to find information, although multiple others are available; awareness must be raised over improving current strategies for data mining high-quality information for the patients and the healthcare community.

Dietary and herbal supplements for weight loss: assessing the quality of patient information online

Background

Given the high prevalence of dietary and herbal supplement (DHS) use in tandem with the growing ease of internet access, patients commonly search online for consumer health information about these products. One common reason for DHSs use includes weight loss. Healthcare providers need to be aware of the quality of online information about DHSs for weight loss so they can adequately counsel their patients and provide them with guidance surrounding the identification of high-quality information resources. This study aimed to assess the quality of online DHSs consumer health information for weight loss that a “typical” patient might access online.

Methods

Six search terms were used to generate the first 20 websites on the Google search engine in four countries: Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States (n = 480 websites). After applying exclusion criteria, eligible websites were quality assessed using the DISCERN instrument. This tool is comprised of 16 questions, each evaluated on a 5-point scale. The averages and standard deviations for each DISCERN instrument item, in addition to overall summed scores between 15 and 75 were calculated.

Results

Across 87 eligible websites, the mean summed score was 44.80 (SD = 11.53), while the mean overall DISCERN score of each website was 2.72 (SD = 0.99). In general, websites detailed and achieved their specified aims and described treatment benefits. However, most websites failed to describe the impact of treatment on overall quality of life and the impact of a no treatment option. The highest-scoring websites were largely government or health portal websites, while the lowest-scoring websites were largely commercial in nature.

Conclusion

High variability in DISCERN instrument scores was found across all websites assessed. Healthcare providers should be aware of the fact that their patients may be accessing misinformation online surrounding the use of DHSs for weight loss. Therefore, it is important for healthcare providers to ensure that they are providing their patients with guidance on how to identify high-quality resources online, in order that safe, effective, and evidence-based decisions are made surrounding the use of DHSs for weight loss.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12937-021-00729-x.

Dietary and herbal supplements for fatigue: A quality assessment of online consumer health information

Background

The Internet is increasingly utilized by patients to acquire information about dietary and herbal supplements (DHSs). Previously published studies assessing the quality of websites providing consumer health information about DHSs have been found to contain inaccuracies and misinformation that may compromise patient safety.. The present study assessed the quality of online DHSs consumer health information for fatigue.

Methods

Six unique search terms were searched on Google, each relating to fatigue and DHSs, across four countries. Across 480 websites identified, 48 were deemed eligible and were quality assessed using the DISCERN instrument, a standardized index of the quality of consumer health information.

Results

Across 48 eligible websites, the mean summed score was 47.64 (SD = 10.38) and the mean overall rating was 3.06 (SD = 0.90). Commercial sites were the most numerous in quantity, but contained information of the poorest quality. In general, websites lacked discussion surrounding uncertainty of information, describing what would happen if no treatment was used, and how treatment choices affect overall quality of life.

Conclusion

Physicians and other healthcare professionals should be aware of the high variability in the quality of online information regarding the use of DHSs for fatigue and facilitate open communication with patients to guide them towards reliable online sources.

The quality of health information on allergic rhinitis, rhinitis, and sinusitis available on the internet

Purpose

The internet has become one of the most important media outlets used to obtain health information. Therefore, the quality of health information available on the internet is very important. We evaluated the quality of internet-derived health information on allergic rhinitis, rhinitis and sinusitis and compared these results to those of previous studies performed five years ago.

Methods

The terms "allergic rhinitis (AR)", "rhinitis" and "sinusitis" were searched among the four most commonly used search engines in South Korea. These websites were evaluated according to the author, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, the DISCERN questionnaire and the Allergic rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) 2008 Update.

Results

A total of 120 websites were obtained and analyzed. For all diseases, "Oriental physician" had the largest portion (almost half of all websites), followed by "Western physician". Based on analyses using the JAMA benchmark, "Attribution" and "Disclosure" were ignored in almost all surveyed websites. According to the scores of the DISCERN question, the majority of websites did not supply appropriate references for their health information, and information on the negative aspects of treatment such as risks and uncertainty was not provided in several websites. In an analysis based on the ARIA 2008 Update concepts, 65% of websites pertaining to health information on AR contained unreliable information.

Conclusions

The quality of health information on the internet was not acceptable. Thus, governmental regulation or control to improve the quality of health information is required.