Analysis of the Patient Information Quality and Readability on Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) on the Internet

Laparoscopic myomectomy videos on WebSurg and YouTube: does peer review process make a difference?

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the quality of laparoscopic myomectomy videos on YouTube and WebSurg.

Material and Methods

We searched using the keyword "laparoscopic myomectomy" on WebSurg and selected surgical interventions in the gynecology section. Eleven videos on WebSurg were enrolled. We selected the 22 most-relevant videos on YouTube to create a comparison group, with a ratio of 1:2. Sound in videos, number of subscribers, views, likes, and comments, number of days since videos were uploaded and durations of videos were recorded. View/day, like/view, like/subscriber, and view/subscriber ratios were calculated. The videos were evaluated with usefulness score (US), global quality scoring (GQS), modified discern score (mDS) and laparoscopic surgery video educational guidelines (LAP-VEGaS).

Results

The view/day ratio was lower in WebSurg compared to YouTube [1.3 (1.9) vs. 7.5 (30.6), respectively; p=0.039]. No difference was found between WebSurg and YouTube in terms of US, GQS and mDS. On LAP-VEGaS assessment, WebSurg was found to be superior to YouTube in terms of intraoperative findings [2 (1-2) vs. 1 (0-2), p=0.001], additional materials [1 (0-2) vs. 1 (0-1), p=0.041], audio/written commentary [2 (2-2) vs. 2 (0-2), p=0.037], image quality [2 (2-2) vs. 2 (0-2), p=0.023], questions and total score [12 (11-13) vs. 10.5 (4-13), p=0.006]. The proportion of high-quality video was higher in WebSurg compared to YouTube, when the cut-off value of total score of 11 or 12 was used as 10 (100%) vs. 10 (50%), p=0.011 and 9 (90%) vs. 5 (25%), p=0.001, respectively.

Conclusion

WebSurg was better compared to YouTube in terms of quality of laparoscopic myomectomy videos.

Factors Affecting Engagement in Web-Based Health Care Patient Information: Narrative Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Web-based content is rapidly becoming the primary source of health care information. There is a pressing need for web-based health care content to not only be accurate but also be engaging. Improved engagement of people with web-based health care content has the potential to inform as well as influence behavioral change to enable people to make better health care choices. The factors associated with better engagement with web-based health care content have previously not been considered.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study are to identify the factors that affect engagement with web-based health care content and develop a framework to be considered when creating such content.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the PubMed and MEDLINE database was performed from January 1, 1946, to January 5, 2020. The reference lists of all included studies were also searched. The Medical Subject Headings database was used to derive the following keywords: "patient information," "online," "internet," "web," and "content." All studies in English pertaining to the factors affecting engagement in web-based health care patient information were included. No restrictions were set on the study type. Analysis of the themes arising from the results was performed using inductive content analysis.

RESULTS

The search yielded 814 articles, of which 56 (6.9%) met our inclusion criteria. The studies ranged from observational and noncontrolled studies to quasi-experimental studies. Overall, there was significant heterogeneity in the types of interventions and outcome assessments, which made quantitative assessment difficult. Consensus among all authors of this study resulted in six categories that formed the basis of a framework to assess the factors affecting engagement in web-based health care content: easy to understand, support, adaptability, accessibility, visuals and content, and credibility and completeness.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a paucity of high-quality data relating to the factors that improve the quality of engagement with web-based health care content. Our framework summarizes the reported studies, which may be useful to health care content creators. An evaluation of the utility of web-based content to engage users is of significant importance and may be accessible through tools such as the Net Promoter score. Web 3.0 technology and development of the field of psychographics for health care offer further potential for development. Future work may also involve improvement of the framework through a co-design process.

Readability, understandability, and quality of retinopathy of prematurity information on the web

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to assess the readability, understandability, and quality of information on retinopathy of prematurity presented at websites frequently visited by parents.

METHODS

A total of 220 websites were assessed, which were recruited by searching for "retinopathy of prematurity" at the Google search engine. The readability of each web page was assessed by Flesch Reading Ease Score, Gobbledygook's Gunning Frequency, Flesch Kincaid Grade Level, Coleman Liau score, The Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, Fry Graph Readability Formula, and Automated readability score. The understandability of the web pages included in the study was measured by using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool. Quality was evaluated using Health in Net code and JAMA. The ALEXA traffic tool was used to reference the domains' popularity and visibility.

RESULTS

Sixty-four websites were included to the study. The average Flesch Reading Ease Score was 50.1 ± 11.4, Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook level was 13.4 ± 2.5, The Flesch-Kincaid Grade level was 10.7 ± 2.2, Coleman Liau level was 10.8 ± 1.7, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook level was 10.0 ± 1.9, and Fry Graph Readability Formula 11.9 ± 2.7, Automated readability score 10.4 ± 2.5. The average understandability score for all website-based patient education materials was 76.9 ± 15.2. Total JAMA Benchmark score is 2.27 ± 1.14 (range from 1 to 4). The quality of information at most websites were determined by our chosen assessments to not to be good.

CONCLUSION

Websites addressed to parents for retinopathy of prematurity had found to have high understandability. It was concluded based on this study that readability and quality of presented written materials at online sources need to be improved.

Readability of Printed Online Education Materials on Pituitary Tumors: Untangling a Web of Complexity

BACKGROUND

Patients are increasingly turning to the internet for health education. Due to the complex pathophysiology, clinic-diagnostic profile, and management spectrum of pituitary tumors, an evaluation of the readability of printed online education materials (POEMs) regarding this entity is warranted.

OBJECTIVE

(1) To apply established readability assessment tools to internet search results on the topic of pituitary tumors. (2) To identify sources of complexity in order to guide the creation POEMs that are in line with the reading level of the target audience.Methodology: After independent, neutral internet search for the phrase "pituitary tumor," the first 100 results were subjected to inclusion criteria matching. Analysis was performed using 5 readability assessment tools including Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning-Fog Score (GFS), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG).

RESULTS

A total of 82 websites met inclusion criteria. All websites were found to be at a higher reading level (P < .01) than the United States Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS) recommended sixth-grade level. Mean readability scores were as follows: FRE, 38.79; FKGL, 11.27; GFS, 12.83; CLI, 17.31; SMOG, 12.12. Intergroup comparison between FKGL, GFS, CLI, and SMOG yielded that CLI was significantly higher (P < .03). No significant differences in readability were noted between academic and other websites.

CONCLUSION

There is a significant misalignment between the reading level of patients and the readability of pituitary tumor POEMs. This may lead patients to misconceive their diagnoses, management options, and prognosis.

The quality, understandability, readability, and popularity of online educational materials for heart murmur

OBJECTIVE

Murmurs are abnormal audible heart sounds produced by turbulent blood flow. Therefore, murmurs in a child may be a source of anxiety for family members. Families often use online materials to explore possible reasons for these murmurs, given the accessibility of information on the Internet. In this study, we evaluated the quality, understandability, readability, and popularity of online materials about heart murmur.

METHODS

An Internet search was performed for "heart murmur" using the Google search engine. The global quality score (on a scale of 1 to 5, corresponding to poor to excellent quality) and Health on the Net code were used to measure the quality of information presented. The understandability of the web pages identified was measured using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (score range from 0 to 100%, scores below 70% reflect poor performance). The readability of each web pages was assessed using four validated indices: the Flesch Reading Ease Score, the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, the Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook, and the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook. The ALEXA traffic tool was used to reference domains' popularity and visibility.

RESULTS

We identified 230 English-language patient educational materials that discussed heart murmur. After exclusion, a total of 86 web pages were evaluated for this study. The average global quality score was 4.34 (SD = 0.71; range from 3 to 5) indicating that the quality of information of most websites was good. Only 14 (16.3%) websites had Health on the Net certification. The mean understandability score for all Internet-based patient educational materials was 74.6% (SD = 12.8%; range from 31.2 to 93.7%). A score suggesting these Internet-based patient educational materials were "easy to understand". The mean readability levels of all patient educational materials were higher than the recommended sixth-grade reading level, according to all indices applied. This means that the level of readability is difficult. The average grade level for all web pages was 10.4 ± 1.65 (range from 7.53 to 14.13). The Flesch-Kincaid Grade level was 10 ± 1.81, the Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook level was 12.1 ± 1.85, and the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook level was 9.1 ± 1.38. The average Flesch Reading Ease Score was 55 ± 9.1 (range from 32.4 to 72.9).

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated that web pages describing heart murmurs were understandable and high quality. However, the readability level of the websites was above the recommended sixth-grade reading level. Readability of written materials from online sources need to be improved. However, care must be taken to ensure that the information of web pages is of a high quality and understandable.