Assessment of quality and readability of internet-based health information related to commonly prescribed angiotensin receptor blockers

Public Health Messaging to Older Adults About Hypertension

Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease, cognitive decline, and frailty. Given the increasing burden of hypertension in the aging population, it is imperative to improve hypertension management in that population. Apart from variations in treatment goals, challenges such as polypharmacy, medication side effects, and therapeutic inertia hinder adherence to guideline-directed medical therapies among older people. Effective public health messaging is essential for spreading evidence-based guidelines, raising awareness among clinicians, enhancing patient education and health literacy, and implementing community-based strategies to tackle hypertension. This review examines the current state of public messaging on hypertension in older adults.

Comparing ChatGPT and Bing, in response to the Home Blood Pressure Monitoring (HBPM) knowledge checklist

High blood pressure is one of the major public health problems that is prevalent worldwide. Due to the rapid increase in the number of users of artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT and Bing, it is expected that patients will use these tools as a source of information to obtain information about high blood pressure. The purpose of this study is to check the accuracy, completeness, and reproducibility of answers provided by ChatGPT and Bing to the knowledge questionnaire of blood pressure control at home. In this study, ChatGPT and Bing's responses to the HBPM 10-question knowledge checklist on blood pressure measurement were independently reviewed by three cardiologists. The mean accuracy rating of ChatGPT was 5.96 (SD = 0.17) indicating the responses were highly accurate overall, with the vast majority receiving the top score. The mean accuracy and completeness of ChatGPT were 5.96 (SD = 0.17) and 2.93 (SD = 0.25) and in Bing were 5.31 (SD = 0.67), and 2.13 (SD = 0.53) Respectively. Due to the expansion of artificial intelligence applications, patients can use new tools such as ChatGPT and Bing to search for information and at the same time can trust the information obtained. we found that the answers obtained from ChatGPT are reliable and valuable for patients, while Bing is also considered a powerful tool, it has more limitations than ChatGPT, and the answers should be interpreted with caution.

Evaluation of the quality of online patient information at the intersection of complementary and alternative medicine and hypertension

Background

Hypertension impacts 1.1 billion people globally; many patients seek complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), as a result of adverse side effects from antihypertensive medications or because they believe natural options are safer. The internet is increasingly playing a role in patient health information-seeking behavior, however, the variability of information quality across websites is unclear. Thus, the purpose of this study was to assess the quality of websites providing consumer health information at the intersection of hypertension and CAM.

Methods

Four unique terms were searched on Google, across Australia, Canada, the US, and the UK. The first 20 webpages resulting from each search were screened for eligibility, and were included if they contained consumer health information relating to CAM therapies for the treatment/management of hypertension. To assess the quality of health information on eligible websites, we used the DISCERN instrument, a standardized quality index of consumer health information.

Results

Of 90 unique webpages, 40 websites were deemed eligible and quality assessed. The 40 eligible websites were classified into seven categories: professional (n = 15), news (n = 11), non-profit (n = 5), health portal (n = 3), commercial (n = 2), government (n = 1), and other (n = 3). The mean summed DISCERN score was 52.34 (standard deviation [SD] = 10.69) out of 75 and the mean overall score was 3.49 (SD = 0.08) out of 5. A total of 10 websites had a total DISCERN score of 60.00 and above with an average rating of 4.33. Among these, Medicine Net (69.00) and WebMD (69.00) were determined to have the highest quality information. Websites generally scored well with respect to providing their aims, identifying treatment benefits and options, and discussing shared-decision making; websites generally lacked references and provided inadequate information surrounding treatment risks and impact on quality of life.

Conclusions

While some websites provided high-quality consumer health information, many others provided information of suboptimal quality. A need exists to better educate patients about identifying misinformation online. Healthcare providers should also inquire about their patients’ health information-seeking behavior, and provide them with the guidance necessary to identify high-quality resources which they can use to inform shared-decision making.

An objective analysis of quality and readability of online information on COVID-19

High quality, readable health information is vital to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to assess the quality and readability of online COVID-19 information using 6 validated tools. This is a cross-sectional study. "COVID-19" was searched across the three most popular English language search engines. Quality was evaluated using the DISCERN score, Journal of the American Medical Association benchmark criteria and Health On the Net Foundation Code of Conduct. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level and Gunning-Fog Index. 41 websites were suitable for analysis. 9.8% fulfilled all JAMA criteria. Only one website was HONCode certified. Mean DISCERN score was 47.8/80 ("fair"). This was highest in websites published by a professional society/medical journal/healthcare provider. Readability varied from an 8th to 12th grade level. The overall quality of online COVID-19 information was "fair". Much of this information was above the recommended 5th to 6th grade level, impeding access for many.