Knee osteotomy: Quality tools and readability data of information on the internet.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Broderick JM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7744941 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Knee osteotomy: Quality tools and readability data of information on the internet.
Broderick James M JM McCarthy Andrea A Hogan Niall N
Data in brief 20201208
Supplementary data for the article <b>Osteotomy around the Knee: Assessment of Quality, Content and Readability of Online Information</b> is provided. 45 unique websites were evaluated. The DISCERN score, JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) benchmark criteria and HONcode (Health On the Net) criteria are provided for reference. Readability of online information was analysed with Readability Studio Professional Edition, Version 2019 (Oleander Software Ltd.). The software assessed re ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe Internet has become a powerful, accessible resource for many patients to use for their own medical management and knowledge. Vestibular disorders are prevalent, especially in the elderly. As the Internet is increasingly a major source of health-related information to the general public, it is often used to search for information regarding dizziness and vertigo. Ensuring that the information is accessible, unbiased, and appropriate can aid informed decision-making.ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality and readability of English-language Internet information related to vestibular disorders.MethodsA cross-sectional website search using three keywords (nausea, dizziness, and vertigo) in five country-specific versions of the most commonly used Internet search engine was conducted in March 2018. The language was limited to English for all websites. Quality was assessed by presence of Health on the Net (HON) certification and DISCERN scores. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Formula (F-KGL), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG).ResultsIn total, 112 websites were included and analyzed. The majority were commercial (61%) websites. A total of 42% had obtained HON certification. No association was found between the presence of HON certification and the resource of the website. The DISCERN scores had a mean of 2.52 (SD 1.1). Readability measures indicated that an average of 14-18 years of education was required to read and understand the Internet information provided regarding vestibular disorders.ConclusionsTo ensure the accessible to the general population, it is necessary to improve the quality and readability of Internet-based information regarding vestibular disorders.
| S-EPMC9249283 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study Design An Internet-based evaluation of Web sites regarding lumbar fusion. Objective The Internet has become a major resource for patients; however, the quality and readability of Internet information regarding lumbar fusion is unclear. The objective of this study is to evaluate the quality and readability of Internet information regarding lumbar fusion and to determine whether these measures changed with Web site modality, complexity of the search term, or Health on the Net Code of Conduct certification. Methods Using five search engines and three different search terms of varying complexity ("low back fusion," "lumbar fusion," and "lumbar arthrodesis"), we identified and reviewed 153 unique Web site hits for information quality and readability. Web sites were specifically analyzed by search term and Web site modality. Information quality was evaluated on a 5-point scale. Information readability was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid score for reading grade level. Results The average quality score was low. The average reading grade level was nearly six grade levels above that recommended by National Work Group on Literacy and Health. The quality and readability of Internet information was significantly dependent on Web site modality. The use of more complex search terms yielded information of higher reading grade level but not higher quality. Conclusions Higher-quality information about lumbar fusion conveyed using language that is more readable by the general public is needed on the Internet. It is important for health care providers to be aware of the information accessible to patients, as it likely influences their decision making regarding care.
| S-EPMC4771515 | biostudies-other
Project description:Despite the substantial amount of health-related information available on the Internet, little is known about the accessibility, quality, and reading grade level of that health information.To evaluate health information on breast cancer, depression, obesity, and childhood asthma available through English- and Spanish-language search engines and Web sites.Three unique studies were performed from July 2000 through December 2000. Accessibility of 14 search engines was assessed using a structured search experiment. Quality of 25 health Web sites and content provided by 1 search engine was evaluated by 34 physicians using structured implicit review (interrater reliability >0.90). The reading grade level of text selected for structured implicit review was established using the Fry Readability Graph method.For the accessibility study, proportion of links leading to relevant content; for quality, coverage and accuracy of key clinical elements; and grade level reading formulas.Less than one quarter of the search engine's first pages of links led to relevant content (20% of English and 12% of Spanish). On average, 45% of the clinical elements on English- and 22% on Spanish-language Web sites were more than minimally covered and completely accurate and 24% of the clinical elements on English- and 53% on Spanish-language Web sites were not covered at all. All English and 86% of Spanish Web sites required high school level or greater reading ability.Accessing health information using search engines and simple search terms is not efficient. Coverage of key information on English- and Spanish-language Web sites is poor and inconsistent, although the accuracy of the information provided is generally good. High reading levels are required to comprehend Web-based health information.
| S-EPMC4182102 | biostudies-other
Project description:Patients are increasingly using the Internet to inform themselves of health-related topics and procedures, including EGD. We analyzed the quality of information and readability of websites after a search on 3 different search engines. We used an assessment tool for website quality analysis that we developed in addition to using validated instruments for website quality, Global Quality Score (GQS) and Health on Net (HON) certification. The readability was assessed using Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade level (FKG). 30 results of each search terms 'EGD' and 'Upper Endoscopy' from Google and 15 each from Bing and Yahoo were analyzed. A total of 45 websites were included from 100 URLs after removing duplicates, video links, and journal articles. Only 3 websites were found to have good quality and comprehensive and authentic information. These websites were https://www.healthline.com, https://www.uptodate.com, and https://www.emedicine.medscape.com. There were additional 13 sites with moderate quality of information. The mean Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease (FRE) score was 46.92 (range 81.6-6.5). The mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade level (FKG) was 11th grade, with a range of 6th grade to 12th grade and above making them difficult to read. Our study shows that there are quite a few websites with moderate quality content. We recommend 3 comprehensive and authentic websites out of 45 URLs analyzed for information on Internet for EGD. In addition, the readability of the websites was consistently at a higher level than recommended by AMA at 11th grade level. In addition, we identified 3 websites with moderate quality content written at 8th grade and below readability level. We feel that gastroenterologists can help their patients better understand this procedure by directing them to these comprehensive websites.
| S-EPMC6231384 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background Patients living with fibromyalgia strongly prefer to access health information on the web. However, the majority of subjects in previous studies strongly expressed their concerns about the quality of online information resources. Objectives The purpose of this study was to evaluate existing online fibromyalgia information resources for content, quality and readability by using standardised quality and readability tools. Methods The first 25 websites were identified using Google and the search keyword 'fibromyalgia'. Pairs of raters independently evaluated website quality using two structured tools (DISCERN and a quality checklist). Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease score maps. Results Ranking of the websites' quality varied by the tool used, although there was general agreement about the top three websites (Fibromyalgia Information, Fibromyalgia Information Foundation and National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases). Content analysis indicated that 72% of websites provided information on treatment options, 68% on symptoms, 60% on diagnosis and 40% on coping and resources. DISCERN ratings classified 32% websites as 'very good', 32% as 'good and 36% as 'marginal'. The mean overall DISCERN score was 36.88 (good). Only 16% of websites met the recommended literacy level grade of 6-8 (range 7-15). Conclusion Higher quality websites tended to be less readable. Online fibromyalgia information resources do not provide comprehensive information about fibromyalgia, and have low quality and poor readability. While information is very important for those living with fibromyalgia, current resources are unlikely to provide necessary or accurate information, and may not be usable for most people.
| S-EPMC3191440 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AIMS AND OBJECTIVES:To evaluate online information on dysmenorrhoea, including readability, credibility, quality and usability. BACKGROUND:Menstrual pain impacts 45%-95% of women of reproductive age globally and is the leading cause of school and work absences among women. Women often seek online information on dysmenorrhoea; however, little is known about the information quality. DESIGN:This was a descriptive study to evaluate online information on dysmenorrhoea. METHODS:We imitated search strategies of the general public. Specifically, we employed the three most popular search engines worldwide-Google, Yahoo and Bing-and used lay search terms, "period pain" and "menstrual cramps." We screened 60 web pages. Following removal of duplicates and irrelevant web pages, 25 met the eligibility criteria. Two team members independently evaluated the included web pages using standardised tools. Readability was evaluated with the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade formulas; credibility, quality and usability were evaluated with established tools. We followed the STROBE checklist for reporting this study. RESULTS:For readability, the mean Flesch-Kincaid level was 10th grade. For credibility, 8% of web pages referenced scientific literature and 28% stated the author's name and qualifications. For quality, no web page employed user-driven content production; 8% of web pages referenced evidence-based guidelines, 32% of web pages had accurate content, and 4% of web pages recommended shared decision-making. Most web pages were interactive and included nontextual information. Some nontextual information was inaccurate. CONCLUSION:Online information on dysmenorrhoea has generally low readability, mixed credibility and variable quality. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE:Strategies to improve health information on dysmenorrhoea include avoiding complex terms, incorporating visual aids, presenting evidence-based information and developing a decision aid to support shared decision-making. Healthcare providers should be aware of the problematic health information that individuals are exposed to and provide education about how to navigate online health information.
| S-EPMC6739134 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrently, the Internet seems to be a helpful tool for obtaining information about everything that we think about, including diseases, their prevention and treatment approaches. However, doubts exist regarding the quality and readability of such information. This study sought to assess the quality and readability of web-based Arabic information on periodontal disease.MethodsIn this infodemiological study, the Google, Yahoo!, and Bing search engines were searched using specific Arabic terms on periodontal disease. The first 100 consecutive websites from each engine were obtained. The eligible websites were categorized as commercial, health/professional, journalism, and other. The following tools were applied to assess the quality of the information on the included websites: the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode), the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, and the DISCERN tool. The readability was assessed using an online readability tool.ResultsOf the 300 websites, 89 were eligible for quality and readability analyses. Only two websites (2.3%) were HONcode certified. Based on the DISCERN tool, 43 (48.3%) websites had low scores. The mean score of the JAMA benchmarks was 1.6 ± 1.0, but only 3 (3.4%) websites achieved "yes" responses for all four JAMA criteria. Based on the DISCERN tool, health/professional websites revealed the highest quality of information compared to other website categories. Most of the health/professional websites revealed moderate-quality information, while 55% of the commercial websites, 66% of journalism websites, and 43% of other websites showed poor quality information. Regarding readability, most of the analyzed websites presented simple and readable written content.ConclusionsAside from readable content, Arabic health information on the analyzed websites on periodontal disease is below the required level of quality.
| S-EPMC7863442 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveHigh tibial osteotomy (HTO) and knee joint distraction (KJD) are treatments to unload the osteoarthritic (OA) joint with proven success in postponing a total knee arthroplasty (TKA). While both treatments demonstrate joint repair, there is limited information about the quality of the regenerated tissue. Therefore, the change in quality of the repaired cartilaginous tissue after KJD and HTO was studied using delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage (dGEMRIC).DesignForty patients (20 KJD and 20 HTO), treated for medial tibiofemoral OA, were included in this study. Radiographic outcomes, clinical characteristics, and cartilage quality were evaluated at baseline, and at 1- and 2-year follow-up.ResultsTwo years after KJD treatment, clear clinical improvement was observed. Moreover, a statistically significant increased medial (Δ 0.99 mm), minimal (Δ 1.04 mm), and mean (Δ 0.68 mm) radiographic joint space width (JSW) was demonstrated. Likewise, medial (Δ 1.03 mm), minimal (Δ 0.72 mm), and mean (Δ 0.46 mm) JSW were statistically significantly increased on radiographs after HTO. There was on average no statistically significant change in dGEMRIC indices over two years and no difference between treatments. Yet there seemed to be a clinically relevant, positive relation between increase in cartilage quality and patients' experienced clinical benefit.ConclusionsTreatment of knee OA by either HTO or KJD leads to clinical benefit, and an increase in cartilage thickness on weightbearing radiographs for over 2 years posttreatment. This cartilaginous tissue was on average not different from baseline, as determined by dGEMRIC, whereas changes in quality at the individual level correlated with clinical benefit.
| S-EPMC6918034 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOsteoarthritis (OA) is the most common cause of disability in people older than 65 years. Readability of online OA information has never been assessed. A 2003 study found the quality of online OA information to be poor.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to review the readability and quality of current online information regarding OA.MethodsThe term osteoarthritis was searched across the three most popular English language search engines. The first 25 pages from each search engine were analyzed. Duplicate pages, websites featuring paid advertisements, inaccessible pages (behind a pay wall, not available for geographical reasons), and nontext pages were excluded. Readability was measured using Flesch Reading Ease Score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and Gunning-Fog Index. Website quality was scored using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria and the DISCERN criteria. Presence or absence of the Health On the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode) certification, age of content, content producer, and author characteristics were noted.ResultsA total of 37 unique websites were found suitable for analysis. Readability varied by assessment tool from 8th to 12th grade level. This compares with the recommended 7th to 8th grade level. Of the 37, 1 (2.7%) website met all 4 JAMA criteria. Mean DISCERN quality of information for OA websites was "fair," compared with the "poor" grading of a 2003 study. HONcode-endorsed websites (43%, 16/37) were of a statistically significant higher quality.ConclusionsReadability of online health information for OA was either equal to or more difficult than the recommended level.
| S-EPMC6754692 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study sought to assess the quality and readability of web-based Arabic health information on COVID-19.MethodsThree search engines were searched on 13 April 2020 for specific Arabic terms on COVID-19. The first 100 consecutive websites from each engine were analyzed for eligibility, which resulted in a sample of 36 websites. These websites were subjected to quality assessments using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks tool, the DISCERN tool, and Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode) certification. The readability of the websites was assessed using an online readability calculator.ResultsAmong the 36 eligible websites, only one (2.7%) was HONcode certified. No website attained a high score based on the criteria of the DISCERN tool; the mean score of all websites was 31.5 ± 12.55. As regards the JAMA benchmarks results, a mean score of 2.08 ± 1.05 was achieved by the websites; however, only four (11.1%) met all the JAMA criteria. The average grade levels for readability were 7.2 ± 7.5, 3.3 ± 0.6 and 93.5 ± 19.4 for the Flesch Kincaid Grade Level, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, and Flesch Reading Ease scales, respectively.ConclusionAlmost all of the most easily accessible web-based Arabic health information on COVID-19 does not meet recognized quality standards regardless of the level of readability and ability to be understood by the general population of Arabic speakers.
| S-EPMC7812558 | biostudies-literature