Quality Of Health Information Research Articles

Empowering Pregnant Women: A Community-Based Health Education Intervention to Promote Healthy Behaviors

Pregnant women in rural areas like Lubuk Alung often face barriers to accessing quality health information and care, leading to suboptimal health behaviors during pregnancy. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a community-based health education intervention on pregnant women's knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding healthy behaviors in Lubuk Alung. A quasi-experimental study was conducted with 150 pregnant women (75 intervention, 75 control) in Lubuk Alung. The intervention group received a 12-week program of structured health education sessions delivered by trained community health workers. Sessions covered topics such as nutrition, exercise, antenatal care, childbirth preparation, and breastfeeding. The control group received standard antenatal care. Pre- and post-intervention surveys assessed knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported practices related to healthy behaviors. The intervention group demonstrated significant improvements in knowledge about healthy behaviors (p<0.001), more positive attitudes towards these behaviors (p<0.01), and increased adoption of practices like consuming a balanced diet, engaging in regular physical activity, attending antenatal care visits, and exclusive breastfeeding (p<0.05). The control group showed minimal changes. In conclusion, community-based health education interventions are effective in empowering pregnant women in rural settings. They increase knowledge, shift attitudes, and promote the adoption of healthy behaviors during pregnancy. Such programs should be integrated into routine antenatal care services in areas like Lubuk Alung.

Patient-Engagement Health Information Technology and Quality Process Outcomes in Federally Qualified Health Centers.

Health information technology (HIT) for patient-engagement can positively influence the quality and efficiency of health care delivery. Although this topic is of significant importance, it has not been fully addressed in the federally qualified health center (FQHC) context. This research investigates the relationship between the level of patient-engagement HIT and FQHC preventive health care quality outcomes. Based on the Uniform Data System (UDS), this study employed multivariable regression analysis to investigate the association between the level of patient-engagement HIT and FQHC preventive health care quality outcomes. FQHCs were placed in 4 mutually exclusive groups based on the level of FQHC use of patient-engagement HIT. The results indicate that compared with the most comprehensive patient-engagement HIT at FQHCs, less comprehensive patient-engagement HIT was associated with lower rates of preventive care provision. Comprehensive patient-engagement HIT across FQHCs may improve preventive health care quality outcomes. The results support policy incentives for FQHCs with less comprehensive levels of patient-engagement HIT to foster improved preventive care for their patients.

Variations in Unmet Health Care Needs by Perceptions of Social Media Health Mis- and Disinformation, Frequency of Social Media Use, Medical Trust, and Medical Care Discrimination: Cross-Sectional Study.

Unmet need for health care is defined as choosing to postpone or completely avoid necessary medical treatment despite having a need for it, which can worsen current conditions or contribute to new health problems. The emerging infodemic can be a barrier that prevents people from accessing quality health information, contributing to lower levels of seeking medical care when needed. We evaluated the association between perceptions of health mis- and disinformation on social media and unmet need for health care. In addition, we evaluated mechanisms for this relationship, including frequency of social media use, medical trust, and medical care discrimination. Data from 3964 active adult social media users responding to the 2022 Health Information National Trends Survey 6 (HINTS 6), a nationally representative survey, were analyzed. The outcome was unmet need for medical care, defined as delaying or not getting the necessary medical care. The predictor variables were perception of social media health mis- and disinformation, frequency of social media use, level of trust in the health care system, and perceived racial and ethnic discrimination when receiving health care. Multivariable logistic regression models indicated that perception of substantial social media health mis- and disinformation (odds ratio [OR] 1.40, 95% CI 1.07-1.82), daily use of social media (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.01-1.79), low medical trust (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.06-2.01), and perceived discrimination (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.44-3.50) were significantly associated with a higher likelihood of unmet need for medical care. Unmet need among adults who did not use social media daily and who did not perceive substantial mis- and disinformation (24%; 95% CI 19%-30%) was lower compared to daily social media users who perceived substantial mis- and disinformation (38%; 95% CI 32%-43%). Adults who perceived substantial mis- and disinformation and had low trust in health care had the highest probability of reporting unmet need (43%; 95% CI 38%-49%) compared to the other three groups. Adults who perceived substantial mis- and disinformation and experienced medical care discrimination had a statistically significant higher probability of reporting unmet need (51%; 95% CI 40%-62%) compared to adults who did not experience medical care discrimination and did not perceive substantial mis- and disinformation (29%; 95% CI 26%-32%). Unmet need for medical care was higher among individuals who perceived a substantial degree of social media mis- and disinformation, especially among those who used social media daily, did not trust the health care system, and experienced racial or ethnic discrimination when receiving health care. To counter the negative effects of social media mis- and disinformation on unmet need for health care, public health messaging must focus on daily social media users as well as improving trust and reducing structural racism in the health care system.

20 An Evaluation of the Quality and Readability of Online Information Regarding TMJ Dysfunction

Abstract Aim The accessibility and availability of the internet has allowed people to increasingly seek health information online, and therefore it plays an essential role in the decision-making process of the patient. The study aimed to assess the quality and readability of online health information on TMJ dysfunction. Method The search was conducted on Google using keywords: jaw pain, jaw locking, jaw discomfort, jaw clicking, jaw popping, temporomandibular joint, TMJ dysfunction, TMD and temporomandibular disorder. Ensuring Quality Information for Patient (EQIP) tool was used to assess quality of information and the application of readability score reflected through Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level(FKGL), Gunning-Fog Index(GFI) and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook(SMOG). Results 134 websites were eligible for assessment. The overall median EQIP score was 23, with an IQR of 7 and maximum score of 30. The most common source of information was healthcare industry (n=60; 45%), followed by news services (n=19; 14%), with a median EQIP score of 20 and 25 respectively. Statistically significant differences in overall EQIP scores were found between different sources of information (p=0.004). Only 31(23%) websites achieved the recommended 6th grade or below readability level, and only 14 (10%) discussed complication rates with none mentioning mortality rates at all. Conclusions Most online information on TMJ dysfunction is of suboptimal quality and readability. This study identified areas for improvements when producing patient material regarding TMJ dysfunction. To improve patient education and awareness, content creators should strive to be informative, accurate, and patient-centric.

Quality and Readability of Online Health Information on Common Urologic Cancers: Assessing Barriers to Health Literacy in Urologic Oncology.

A growing number of Americans search online for health information related to urologic oncologic care each year. The American Medical Association recommends that medical information be written at a maximum sixth-grade level in order to be comprehensible by the majority of patients. As such, it is important to assess the quality and readability of online patient education material that patients are being exposed to. A Google search was performed using the terms "testicular cancer," "prostate cancer," "kidney cancer," and "bladder cancer," and the top 30 results for each were reviewed. Websites were categorized based on their source. Readability was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, the Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook, and the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook indices. Quality was assessed using the DISCERN Quality Index (1-5 scale). A total of 91 websites were included in our analysis. On average, online health information pertaining to urologic cancers is written at a 10th- to 11th-grade reading level, which is significantly higher than that of an average American adult and that recommended by the American Medical Association (P < .01). The overall quality of websites was 3.4 ± 0.7, representing moderate to high quality. There was no significant difference in readability based on cancer type or information source. Despite being of moderate to high quality, online patient education materials related to common urologic cancers are often written at a grade level that exceeds the reading level of an average American adult. This presents as a barrier to online health literacy and calls into question the utility of these resources.

Diverticulosis and Diverticulitis on YouTube: Is Popular Information the Most Reliable?

Background Patients utilize online health information to inform their medical decision-making. YouTube is one of the most popular media platforms with abundant health-related resources, yet the quality of the disseminated information remains unclear. This study aims to evaluate the quality and reliability of content pertaining to diverticulosis and diverticulitis on YouTube. Methods One author queried the terms "diverticulosis," "diverticulitis," "acute diverticulitis," and "chronic diverticulitis" on YouTube. The first 50 videos per search were selected for analysis. Duplicates, non-English videos, or procedural content were excluded. Video characteristics including view count, likes, comments, duration, days since upload, view ratio, video power index, and video sources (professional organizations (POs), health information websites (HIWs), and entertainment/independent users (EIUs)) were collected. Videos were scored using the mDISCERN and Global Quality Score (GQS). Results Sixty-four videos were included. DISCERN scores significantly differed between POs (n=20, mean=4.35), HIWs (n=29, mean=2.97), and EIUs (n=15, mean=1.83). GQS also significantly differed between POs (n=20, mean=4.47), HIWs (n=29, mean=3.62), and EIUs (n=15, mean=2.5). Video characteristics significantly differed between groups, with most user engagement seen in EIUs. Conclusion POs and HIWs disseminate higher quality health information about diverticular disease on YouTube. The higher viewer engagement with EIUs is concerning, as these sources were found to have lower quality content. Although YouTube has the capability to provide valuable information on diverticulosis and diverticulitis, enhanced content screening is needed to ensure accuracy and validation.

Readability and Information Quality in Cancer Information From a Free vs Paid Chatbot

The mainstream use of chatbots requires a thorough investigation of their readability and quality of information. To identify readability and quality differences in information between a free and paywalled chatbot cancer-related responses, and to explore if more precise prompting can mitigate any observed differences. This cross-sectional study compared readability and information quality of a chatbot's free vs paywalled responses with Google Trends' top 5 search queries associated with breast, lung, prostate, colorectal, and skin cancers from January 1, 2021, to January 1, 2023. Data were extracted from the search tracker, and responses were produced by free and paywalled ChatGPT. Data were analyzed from December 20, 2023, to January 15, 2024. Free vs paywalled chatbot outputs with and without prompt: "Explain the following at a sixth grade reading level: [nonprompted input]." The primary outcome measured the readability of a chatbot's responses using Flesch Reading Ease scores (0 [graduate reading level] to 100 [easy fifth grade reading level]). Secondary outcomes included assessing consumer health information quality with the validated DISCERN instrument (overall score from 1 [low quality] to 5 [high quality]) for each response. Scores were compared between the 2 chatbot models with and without prompting. This study evaluated 100 chatbot responses. Nonprompted free chatbot responses had lower readability (median [IQR] Flesh Reading ease scores, 52.60 [44.54-61.46]) than nonprompted paywalled chatbot responses (62.48 [54.83-68.40]) (P < .05). However, prompting the free chatbot to reword responses at a sixth grade reading level was associated with increased reading ease scores than the paywalled chatbot nonprompted responses (median [IQR], 71.55 [68.20-78.99]) (P < .001). Prompting was associated with increases in reading ease in both free (median [IQR], 71.55 [68.20-78.99]; P < .001)and paywalled versions (median [IQR], 75.64 [70.53-81.12]; P < .001). There was no significant difference in overall DISCERN scores between the chatbot models, with and without prompting. In this cross-sectional study, paying for the chatbot was found to provide easier-to-read responses, but prompting the free version of the chatbot was associated with increased response readability without changing information quality. Educating the public on how to prompt chatbots may help promote equitable access to health information.

Accuracy, readability, and quality of websites about metastatic renal cell carcinoma treatment

ObjectivesPatients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) face complex treatment decisions and frequently turn to the Internet for treatment information. The content of patient educational websites about mRCC treatment has not been evaluated. This study evaluated the accuracy, readability, and quality of websites about the treatment of mRCC. MethodsA total of 2,700 Internet queries were performed. Across 3 Internet search engines, 25 links of 36 permutations of mRCC keywords and their synonyms were screened for eligibility. Eligible websites were English-language websites containing information about mRCC treatments. Sponsored, social media, provider-facing, and news websites were excluded. Accuracy of eligible websites was evaluated in 2 domains: (1) Completeness by calculating the percentage of mRCC facts included in websites using an investigator-created checklist based on the NCI's RCC Treatment (PDQ®)–patient version, and (2) Correctness by identifying incorrect statements that were inconsistent with guidelines. Websites containing ≥60% of checklist items had a “passing” completeness score. Incorrect statements were tallied and qualitatively categorized. Readability was evaluated using the Fry and SMOG formulae, which calculate reading grade levels. Quality was evaluated using validated instruments that appraise health information quality: QUEST (scored 0–28), which focuses on online information, and DISCERN (scored 16–80), which focuses on treatment choices. ResultsThirty-nine websites were analyzed. Mean completeness score was 30% (range 0%–69%); only 2 (5%) websites had a passing score. Twelve (31%) websites had ≥1 incorrect statement, such as listing homeopathy or hormone therapy as mRCC treatment options, or including outdated statements. Mean readability levels were 11th and 12th grades for the Fry and SMOG methods, respectively. No website had a reading level lower than 9th grade. Mean QUEST score was 19 (range 9–28); authorship, complementarity, and currency items had the lowest scores. Mean DISCERN score was 56 (range 42–76), with 7 (18%) websites rated “excellent”, 22 (56%) rated “good”, and 10 (26%) rated fair. ConclusionsMany websites about mRCC treatment have incomplete, inaccurate, and unreadable information. Quality is highly variable. Efforts to improve accuracy, readability, and quality are needed to ensure that patients with mRCC can make well-informed treatment decisions and avoid harm from misinformation.

An analysis of oral contraceptive related videos on TikTok

BackgroundTikTok has increasingly become a source of information about reproductive health. Patients seeking health information about oral contraception on TikTok may be influenced by videos containing misinformation or biased information. ObjectiveThis social media infodemiological study aims to provide a descriptive content analysis of the quality and reliability of oral contraceptive health information on TikTok. Study DesignResearchers screened 1,000 TikTok videos from December 2022 to March 2023 retrieved under various search terms related to oral contraceptives. Data, including engagement metrics such as views, likes, comments, saves, and shares, were recorded. Video content including contraceptive methods discussed, efficacy, tolerability, and side effects were recorded. Two reviewers independently used a modified DISCERN criteria and Global Quality Scale (GQS) to assess the quality and reliability of information for each video. ResultsFive hundred seventy-four videos were analyzed after applying exclusion criteria. Videos had a median length of 27 seconds (Q1=13sec, Q3=57sec) and received a median of 35,000 total views (Q1=4856 views, Q3=411,400 views) and 166 views per day (Q1=28 views per day, Q3=2021 views per day). Video creators were 83.3% female and 58.7% white. The mean modified DISCERN score was 1.63 (SD=1.06) and the mean GQS score was 2.28 (SD=1.37). Video creators were 83.3% female and 58.7% white. The mean modified DISCERN score was 1.63 (SD=1.06) and the mean GQS score was 2.28 (SD=1.37). The most common topic discussed in the videos was the effects of contraception. Healthcare professionals had significantly higher DISCERN and GQS scores (p<.001) than non-healthcare professionals. However, they received fewer views, likes, and comments on their videos (p<.001). Healthcare professionals were 86 times more likely than non-healthcare professionals to post educational videos (p<.001). However, non-educational content received significantly more views, likes, and comments than educational content (p<.001). ConclusionTikTok videos related to oral contraceptive health had low quality and reliability of information. The majority of videos were made by non-healthcare providers, and the most common topic discussed was the effects of contraception. Videos made by healthcare professionals contained more reliable contraceptive information, but received less engagement than videos made by non-healthcare professionals. Healthcare providers should consider the prevalence of poor-quality information about oral contraceptives on social media when counseling and educating patients about reproductive health.

A Quality and Completeness Assessment of Testicular Cancer Health Information on TikTok

TikTok has become a hub for easily accessible medical information. However, the quality and completeness of this information for testicular cancer has not been examined. Our study aims to assess the quality and completeness of testicular cancer information on TikTok. A search was performed on TikTok using the search terms “Testicular Cancer” and “Testicle Cancer”. Inclusion criteria encompassed videos about testicular cancer in English. We excluded non-English videos, irrelevant videos, and videos without audio. We evaluated these videos using the DISCERN instrument and a completeness assessment. A total of 361 videos were considered for screening and 116 videos were included. Of these, 57 were created by healthcare professionals (HCPs). The median video length was 40 s (5–277 s), with &gt;25 million cumulative views and a median of 446,400 views per video. The average DISCERN score was 29.0 ± 5.7, with HCPs providing higher-quality videos than non-HCPs (30.8 vs. 5.5, p &lt; 0.05). HCPs also had more reliable videos (21.2 vs. 18.1, p &lt; 0.05). Overall quality levels were mostly poor or very poor (97.4%), with none being good or excellent. Most HCP videos were poor (63.2%), whilst many non-HCP videos were very poor (61.0%). The most viewed video had 2,800,000 views but scored a 31 on the DISCERN tool and one on the completeness assessment. The highest DISCERN score had 11,700 views. HCP videos better defined the disease and were more complete (p &lt; 0.05). Most videos discussed self-assessment but were lacking in definitions, risk factors, symptoms, evaluation, management, and outcomes. Most of TikTok’s testicular cancer information lacks quality and completeness, whilst higher-quality videos have limited reach.

TikTok misinformation and user engagement in female pelvic floor conditions.

Social media platforms are increasingly utilized to distribute medical information. Our study emphasizes the need for accuracy in pelvic health education on social media and the involvement of female pelvic floor (FPF) specialistsin content creation. In this cross-sectional study, we assessed the FPFTikTok videos with the highest engagement for quality of information and misinformation and investigated the relationship between misinformation and user engagement. We collected all TikTok videos on the USapp with hashtags related to FPFconditions, including 76 on pelvic organ prolapse, 323 on urinary tract infection, 84 on overactive bladder, and 972 on incontinence. The top 20 videos for each FPF condition were selected based on highest engagement, and 74 videos total met inclusion criteria. TikTok videos were scored with the validated DISCERN instrument for quality of consumer health information and a 5-point Likert scale for misinformation. The correlation between misinformation and user engagement was assessed. Our analysis revealed positive correlations among higher average misinformation scores and shares (r = 0.37, p < 0.001), likes (r = 0.23, p = 0.004), and overall engagement (r = 0.25, p = 0.002) in FPF TikTok videos as a group, likely driven by the #UTI category. Most TikTok videos (96%) had poor quality of information (DISCERN score < 3), and 18% of TikTok videos contained misinformation. The poor quality and prevalence of misinformation inFPF-relatedTikTok videos with the highest engagement raise concerns about the propagation of nonevidence-based health information.

Analysis of Popular Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Content on TikTok.

Researchers used the TikTok platform to investigate the quality of select TikTokeducational content regarding gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). One hundred TikTok videos that fit the inclusion criteria were analyzed using DISCERN, a tool that evaluates the quality of consumer health information on the internet. There was no substantial difference in DISCERN scores between physicians and non-physician content creators. Nevertheless, both groups consistently scored low (<3) in areas such as providing sources of information, indicating the publication date of their sources, discussing treatment risks, and outlining potential consequences if no treatment is pursued.

A cross-sectional analysis of TikTok's most popular dermal filler videos.

Dermal filler injections pose serious risks when administered by untrained individuals or when food and drug administration (FDA) guidelines are not adhered to. This issue may potentially be compounded by a growing reliance on social media platforms for health information. Our objective was to analyze the quality of health information in videos published on dermal filler on TikTok. We searched three hashtags, #filler (2.4 billion views), #dermalfiller (132.8 million views), and #fillersinjection (137.0 million views) and assessed the top videos returned by TikTok's algorithm that met inclusion criteria. The quality of health information was evaluated using the DISCERN instrument, a validated tool that uses a 1 to 5 scale to assess consumer health information. Videos received a mean DISCERN score of 1.64 (SD 0.33), indicating significantly low quality. 7% of the videos promoted non-FDA-approved uses of filler. Notably, videos posted by physician assistants or physicians received the highest mean scores (1.92 and 1.72) as well as videos categorized as educational (1.99). Dermatologists should be aware of the high viewership of low-quality TikTok videos on dermal filler. Dermatologists shall, therefore, understand the importance of their role in providing education to patients on this topic.

Validation of the Quality Analysis of Medical Artificial Intelligence (QAMAI) tool: a new tool to assess the quality of health information provided by AI platforms.

The widespread diffusion of Artificial Intelligence (AI) platforms is revolutionizing how health-related information is disseminated, thereby highlighting the need for tools to evaluate the quality of such information. This study aimed to propose and validate the Quality Assessment of Medical Artificial Intelligence (QAMAI), a tool specifically designed to assess the quality of health information provided by AI platforms. The QAMAI tool has been developed by a panel of experts following guidelines for the development of new questionnaires. A total of 30 responses from ChatGPT4, addressing patient queries, theoretical questions, and clinical head and neck surgery scenarios were assessed by 27 reviewers from 25 academic centers worldwide. Construct validity, internal consistency, inter-rater and test-retest reliability were assessed to validate the tool. The validation was conducted on the basis of 792 assessments for the 30 responses given by ChatGPT4. The results of the exploratory factor analysis revealed a unidimensional structure of the QAMAI with a single factor comprising all the items that explained 51.1% of the variance with factor loadings ranging from 0.449 to 0.856. Overall internal consistency was high (Cronbach's alpha = 0.837). The Interclass Correlation Coefficient was 0.983 (95% CI 0.973-0.991; F (29,542) = 68.3; p < 0.001), indicating excellent reliability. Test-retest reliability analysis revealed a moderate-to-strong correlation with a Pearson's coefficient of 0.876 (95% CI 0.859-0.891; p < 0.001). The QAMAI tool demonstrated significant reliability and validity in assessing the quality of health information provided by AI platforms. Such a tool might become particularly important/useful for physicians as patients increasingly seek medical information on AI platforms.

#PapSmear on TikTok: User Sentiments and Health Information [ID 2683630

INTRODUCTION: TikTok has emerged as a leading social media platform, with many users using the app for educational purposes, including for discussions about obstetrics and gynecology. We assessed tone, content, and quality of health information of TikTok videos tagged with #PapSmear. METHODS: One hundred videos tagged with #PapSmear on TikTok were collected using the data-scraping program, Apify (Prague, Czech Republic). Videos were extracted with their number of views, likes, comments, and shares, and analyzed for tone, themes, creator demographics and health information quality. Two modified standardized scales were used: DISCERN, for health information quality and Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT), for understandability and actionability. RESULTS: We reviewed 93 of 100 videos tagged with #PapSmear. Videos received 237 million views, 19 million likes, and 241 thousand comments in total. Videos were coded as positive (26.9%), negative (37.6%), and neutral (35.5%). Medical professionals created most of the positive videos (68.0%), whereas most negative video creators were not medical professionals (91.4%). Nearly half of positive videos were educational (48.0%), and most negative videos recounted personal patient experiences (60.0%). Videos scored high on understandability (average 73.4%, SD 16.3%) but low on actionability (average 31.9%, SD 34.1%) and quality of health information (2.12, SD 0.4). CONCLUSION: There is a discrepancy in tone between patients and medical professionals in videos tagged with #PapSmear. Videos with educational material were easy to understand, but provided low-quality health information and did not effectively highlight opportunities for patient action. Negative influence from TikTok should be considered in patient–provider communication about Pap smears.

An Analysis of Discourse Surrounding Oral Contraceptives on TikTok [ID 2683389

INTRODUCTION: The lack of comprehensive sex education in U.S. secondary schools has created large knowledge gaps in reproductive health, leading many adolescents and young adults to turn to social media platforms, such as TikTok, for information about contraception. This cross-sectional study aims to provide a descriptive content analysis of the quality and reliability of oral contraceptive health information on TikTok. METHODS: One thousand TikTok videos listed under various search terms related to oral contraceptives were screened. Data including engagement metrics such as views, likes, comments, saves, and shares were recorded. Video content, including contraceptive methods discussed, efficacy, tolerability, and side effects, was recorded. Two reviewers independently used a modified DISCERN criteria and Global Quality Scale (GQS) to assess the quality and reliability of information for each video. According to the IRB, this project has been approved and exempt from further review. RESULTS: Five hundred seventy-four videos were analyzed after applying exclusion criteria. Videos had a median length of 27 seconds and received a median of 166 views per day. Video creators were 83.3% female and 58.7% White. 49.8% of videos discussed adverse effects, whereas only 27.5% discussed positive effects. The mean modified DISCERN score was 1.63±1.062 and the mean GQS score was 2.28±1.374. Health care professionals had significantly higher DISCERN and GQS scores than non-health care professionals; however, they received fewer views and likes on their videos (P&lt;.001). CONCLUSION: TikTok videos related to oral contraceptive health had low quality and reliability of information. The majority of videos were made by non-health care providers, and the most common topic discussed was adverse effects of contraception. Videos made by health care professionals contained more reliable contraceptive information but received less engagement than videos made by non-health care professionals. Health care providers should consider the prevalence of poor quality information about oral contraceptives on social media when counseling and educating patients about reproductive health.

Evaluation of online text-based information resources of gynaecological cancer symptoms.

Gynaecological cancer symptoms are often vague and non-specific. Quality health information is central to timely cancer diagnosis and treatment. The aim of this study was to identify and evaluate the quality of online text-based patient information resources regarding gynaecological cancer symptoms. A targeted website search and Google search were conducted to identify health information resources published by the Australian government and non-government health organisations. Resources were classified by topic (gynaecological health, gynaecological cancers, cancer, general health); assessed for reading level (Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, SMOG) and difficulty (Flesch Reading Ease, FRE); understandability and actionability (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool, PEMAT, 0-100), whereby higher scores indicate better understandability/actionability. Seven criteria were used to assess cultural inclusivity specific for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people; resources which met 3-5 items were deemed to be moderately inclusive and 6+ items as inclusive. A total of 109 resources were identified and 76% provided information on symptoms in the context of gynaecological cancers. The average readability was equivalent to a grade 10 reading level on the SMOG and classified as 'difficult to read' on the FRE. The mean PEMAT scores were 95% (range 58-100) for understandability and 13% (range 0-80) for actionability. Five resources were evaluated as being moderately culturally inclusive. No resource met all the benchmarks. This study highlights the inadequate quality of online resources available on pre-diagnosis gynaecological cancer symptom information. Resources should be revised in line with the recommended standards for readability, understandability and actionability and to meet the needs of a culturally diverse population.

Evaluation of the Quality and Readability of Online Information about Alzheimer’s Disease in China

Background: With the increasing popularity of the internet, a growing number of patients and their companions are actively seeking health-related information online. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the quality and readability of online information about Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in China. Methods: A total of 263 qualified AD-related web pages from different businesses, governments, and hospitals were obtained. The quality of the web pages was assessed using the DISCERN tool, and the readability of the web pages was assessed using a readability measurement website suitable for the Chinese language. The differences in readability and quality between different types of web pages were investigated, and the correlation between quality and readability was analyzed. Results: The mean overall DISCERN score was 40.93±7.5. The government group scored significantly higher than the commercial and hospital groups. The mean readability score was 12.74±1.27, and the commercial group had the lowest readability score. There was a positive correlation between DISCERN scores and readability scores. Conclusions: This study presents an evaluation of the quality and readability of health information pertaining to AD in China. The findings indicate that there is a need to enhance the quality and readability of web pages about AD in China. Recommendations for improvement are proposed in light of these findings.

Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence-Based Virtual Assistants in Responding to Frequently Asked Questions Related to Orthognathic Surgery

BackgroundDespite increasing interest in how conversational agents might improve healthcare delivery and information dissemination, there is limited research assessing the quality of health information provided by these technologies, especially in orthognathic surgery (OGS). PurposeThis study aimed to measure and compare the quality of four virtual assistants (VA) in addressing the frequently asked questions about OGS. Study design, setting, and sampleThis in-silico cross-sectional study, assessed the responses of a sample of four VAs through a standardized set of 10 questionnaires related to OGS. Independent variableThe independent variables were the four VAs. The four VAs tested were VA1: Alexa (Seattle, Washington), VA2: Google Assistant (Google Mountain View, California), VA3: Siri (Cupertino, California), and VA4: Bing (San Diego, California). Main outcome variablesThe primary outcome variable was the quality of the answers generated by the four VAs. Four investigators (two orthodontists and two oral surgeons) assessed the quality of response of the four VAs through a standardized set of 10 questionnaires using a five-point modified Likert scale, with the lowest score (1) signifying the highest quality. The main outcome variables measured were the combined mean scores of the responses from each VA, and the secondary outcome assessed was the variability in responses among the different investigators. CovariatesNone AnalysisOne-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was done to compare the average scores per question. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's post-hoc analyses was done to compare the combined mean scores among the VAs and the combined mean scores of all questions were evaluated to determine variability if any amongst different VA’s responses to the investigators. ResultsAmong the four VAs, VA4 (1.32 ± 0.57) had significantly the lowest (best) score, followed by VA2 (1.55±0.78), VA1 (2.67±1.49), and VA3 (3.52±0.50) (p-value<0.001). There were no significant differences in how the VAs: VA3 (p-value = 0.46), VA4 (p-value = 0.45), and VA2 (p-value = 0.44) responded to each of the investigators except VA1 (p-value = 0.003). ConclusionsThe VAs responded to the queries related to OGS, with VA4 displaying the best quality response, followed by VA2, VA1, and VA3. Technology companies and clinical organizations should partner for an intelligent VA with evidence-based responses specifically curated to educate patients.

Does YouTube™ Provide Adequate Information on Oral Health During Pregnancy?

Background This study aimed to assess the reliability, quality, and content of the information provided by YouTube™videos on oral health during pregnancy to reveal the effectiveness of the videos for patients. Methodology This cross-sectional study was conducted by two experienced dental specialists. They initiated the study by searching for YouTube™ videos using the keyword 'pregnancy oral health'. The videos were then assessed based on various parameters, including origin, type, number of days since upload, duration, number of views, number of likes and dislikes, and number of comments. The specialists also calculated the interaction index and viewing rate. The reliability and quality of the videos were evaluated using the global quality scale (GQS) and modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) scales, while the content was assessed with the comprehensiveness tailor-made index. The data were analyzed with the Shapiro-Wilk, the Kruskal-Wallis, the post-hoc Bonferroni, and Fisher's exact tests. The significance level was set at P < 0.05. Results After reviewing initially 224 videos, 129 were included in the study. Health professionals were the publishers of most videos. A statistically significant positive correlation was found between content scores and video duration, number of comments, interaction index, and total DISCERN scores (p<0.05) (r=0.445, r=0.186, r=0.552, r=0.241, r=0.200, r=0.681, respectively). Statistically significant associations were found between GQS scores, video duration, number of comments, and total mDISCERN scores(p<0.05) (r=0.510, r=225, r=0.156, r=0.768, respectively).Statistically significant relationships were identified between the total content score, video source, and GQS (p<0.05).According to the total content score, 57.4% of the videos had a score of 2, 35.7% had a score of 1, and only 7% had a score of0. Conclusions This study's findings underscore the significant variability in the scientific accuracy, content, and quality of health information on the Internet, particularly on YouTube™. It reveals that, while there are videos that provide rich content and high-quality information, there are also poor-quality and inadequate videos that may mislead patients. Health professionals should be aware of misinformation found on YouTube™ and ensure that patients always have access to accurate and reliable information.