How users make judgements about the quality of online health information: a cross-sectional survey study

Online information about oral health in autism spectrum disorder: Is it good enough?

INTRODUCTION

The use of the internet has surged significantly over the years. Patients and caregivers of patients with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) might consult the internet for oral health-related information. Hence, this study aimed to assess the quality and readability of online information available in the English language regarding oral health in ASD.

METHODS

Online search using Google.com was conducted using the terms "Autism and dental care," "Autism and oral health," and "Autism and dentistry". The first 100 websites for each term were screened. Quality of information was assessed using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for printed material (PEMAT-P) and the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks. A PEMAT score higher than 70% is considered acceptable for readability and actionability. The JAMA benchmarks are authorship, attribution, disclosure, and currency. Readability was evaluated using the Flesch reading ease score and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) readability formula.

RESULTS

Out of the 300 screened websites, 66 were eventually included. The mean PEMAT understandability and actionability scores were 77.13%, and 42.12%, respectively. Only 12.1% of the websites displayed all four JAMA benchmarks. The mean Flesch score was 10th-12th grade level, and the mean SMOG score was 10th grade level.

CONCLUSION

While the understandability of the information was acceptable, the readability and actionability were too challenging for lay people. Health care professionals and organizations involved in patient education should place more efforts in promoting the quality of online information targeting patients with ASD.

Online information for spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) survivors and their families: A systematic appraisal of content and quality of websites

BACKGROUND

Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) survivors often seek information online. However, the quality and content of websites for SCAD survivors is uncertain. This review aimed to systematically identify and appraise websites for SCAD survivors.

METHODS

A systematic review approach was adapted for websites. A comprehensive search of SCAD key-phrases was performed using an internet search engine during January 2023. Websites targeting SCAD survivors were included. Websites were appraised for quality using Quality Component Scoring System (QCSS) and Health Related Website Evaluation Form (HRWEF), suitability using the Suitability Assessment Method (SAM), readability using a readability generator, and interactivity. Content was appraised using a tool based on SCAD international consensus literature. Raw scores from tools were concerted to percentages, then classified variably as excellent through to poor.

RESULTS

A total of 50 websites were identified and included from 600 screened. Overall, content accuracy/scope (53.3 ± 23.3) and interactivity (67.1 ± 11.5) were poor, quality was fair (59.1 ± 22.3, QCSS) and average (83.1 ± 5.8, HRWEF) and suitability was adequate (54.9 ± 13.8, SAM). The mean readability grade was 11.6 (±2.3), far exceeding the recommendations of ≤ 8. By website type, survivor affiliated and medically peer-reviewed health information websites scored highest. Appraisal tools had limitations, such as overlapping appraisal of similar things and less relevant items due to internet modernity.

CONCLUSION

Many online websites are available for SCAD survivors, but often have limited and/or inaccurate content, poor quality, are not tailored to the demographic, and are difficult to read. Appraisal tools for health website require consolidation and further development.

Lower Back Pain Imaging: A Readability Analysis

PURPOSE

The internet provides access to a myriad of educational health-related resources which are an invaluable source of information for patients. Lower back pain is a common complaint that is discussed extensively online. In this article, we aim to determine if the most commonly accessed articles about lower back pain imaging use language that can be understood by most patients. According to the American Medical Association (AMA) and National Institute of Health (NIH), this corresponds to a sixth-grade reading level.

METHODS

Online searches were conducted from the most commonly used search engine, Google, to assess the present state of readability on radiograph imaging for LBP. Then the top 20 populated URL links from each search were utilized based on "health & fitness" search trends and click-through rates (CTRs). The readability of various websites was evaluated with WebFX online software that analyzed the unique websites' text when put into reader view on Firefox web browser version 116.0.3 (64-bit). Evaluation occurred via five common readability indices: the Automated Readability Index (ARI), the Coleman Liau Index (CLI), the SMOG index, the Gunning Fog Score Index (GFSI), and the Flesch Kincaid Grade Level Index (FKGLI). In addition, the Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease Index (FKREI) was also used but was excluded from the calculation due to its measuring scale outside of US grade levels. The number of samples was analyzed via health and fitness-specific CTR from an open-access database from July 2022 to July 2023. This was used to calculate the number of persons clicking and visiting positional URLs (first URL to the 20th URL) from each unique keyword search and the rational criteria for selecting the first 20 websites for each query.

RESULTS

Online material that included LBP imaging information was calculated to have an overall readability score of 10.745 out of the 23 websites obtained from unique searches. The range was a mean readability score of 8 to 14. Notably, 17 websites were excluded from a total of 40 websites due to duplication of the same data (URLs that resulted from both unique searches) and accessibility requiring payment (specifically, an UpToDate link). A readability score of 10.745 refers to an 11th-grade reading level. That is to say, the most commonly visited sites on Google that contain information about lower back pain imaging are, on average, five grade levels higher than the sixth-grade reading level recommended by the AMA and the NIH.

CONCLUSIONS

Most internet content regarding lower back pain imaging is written at a reading level that is above the recommended limit defined by the AMA and NIH. To improve education about lower back pain imaging and the patient-physician relationship, we recommend guiding patients to online material that contains a reading level at the sixth-grade level as suggested by the AMA and NIH.

Knowledge about stem cell sources and obstacles in donation of bone marrow and peripheral blood stem cells: a cross-sectional survey from Ha'il city to track the prospects of regenerative medicine in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Promoting stem cell donation behaviors could be crucial in advancing stem cell-based treatment, research and improving public health in Saudi Arabia. Donation of stem cells can be considered an act of social welfare just like blood donation because stem-cell-based therapies are emerging as a hope for those suffering from chronic health conditions and/or terminal illnesses.

AIM

This study aims at assessing levels of awareness about sources of stem-cells, donor organizations and predictors of stem cell donation behavior in target population.

METHODS

The study employed a cross-sectional online survey method. The study sample comprises 1325 educated Saudi people living in Ha'il city. The survey questionnaire collected data about respondents' demographic background, awareness about various sources of stem cells and stem-cell donor registries, willingness to donate stem cells, registration status and obstacles in stem cell donation registration. Percentages, Chi-square analysis and Odd Ratios were computed to analyze the data.

RESULTS

In this sample, (n = 696; 52%) were males and (n = 629; 48%) were females. Although (n = 1308; 98%) percent of respondents reported willingness to donate stem cell, less than one percent (n = 6; 0.5) were registered with Saudi Stem Cell Registry. Over 50% of respondents hold inaccurate perceptions about sources of stem cell. Odd Ratio (OR) values from binary logistic regression model identified four factors as significant predictors of non-registration status. These included (i) unaware about donor agencies and procedures (OR = 10.07; p < 0.05), (ii) unaware about possibility to donate stem cells (OR = 8.08; p < 0.05) (iii) concerns about impact on health (OR = 10.01; p < 0.05) and (iv) have health issues that does not permit donation (OR = 10.50; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Stem cell registrations can be enhanced through appropriate health education programs that focus on increasing awareness about donation procedures, trustworthy donor organizations and reducing people apprehensions related to donation.