Online health information on induction of labour: A systematic review and quality assessment study

Abstract

ObjectivesMany women will seek information online about induction of labour. However, the quality of the available information varies greatly and there are no regulations regarding the content that is published. Our objective was to systematically evaluate the quality of online health information on induction of labour. Study DesignWe established a bespoke search strategy with our public and patient representative using common induction of labour search terms. In January 2021 we used the metasearch engines Dogpile, Duckduckgo and Ecosia to identify relevant websites and additional searches were undertaken using different google platforms. We included all open access websites in English which provided specific advice to women on induction of labour. We assessed the quality of the websites for their credibility, accuracy, readability, and content quality in duplicate. The websites were compared according to their source of funding, target user and whether they were pregnancy specific websites or generic. There was no funding for this project. ResultsWe screened 2875 websites from the searches. 221 websites were included out of which only 45 (20%) were pregnancy specific and 109 (50%) had governmental funding. Generic websites had higher credibility (median 6.0 vs 5.5; p = 0.031), accuracy (median 10.75 vs 9.5; p = 0.042) and quality scores (median 45.0 vs 40.0; p = 0.036) than pregnancy specific ones. Those with governmental funding had higher quality scores than commercially funded ones for credibility (median 6.5 vs 5.5; p = 0.002), accuracy (median 13.5 vs 9.0; p < 0.000), readability (72.2 vs 61.2; p = 0.001) and quality (51.0 vs 38.5; p=<0.000). ConclusionsThe quality of online health information on induction of labour is varied. Governmental websites seem to offer better quality information to pregnant women awaiting induction of labour.