Readability Of Internet-based Information Research Articles

Evaluation of quality and readability of internet information on voice disorders

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study is to evaluate the readability and quality of Internet information related to vocal health, voice disorders and voice therapy. Study designThis is a cross-sectional study. MethodsEighty-two websites were included. Websites were then analyzed; their origin (clinic/hospital, non-profit, government), quality (Health On the Net [HON] certification and DISCERN scores) and readability (Ateşman readability formula and Bezirci-Yılmaz new readability formula) were assessed. Statistical analysis was used to examine differences between website origin and quality and readability scores and correlations between readability instruments. ResultsOf the 82 websites, 93% were of private clinic/hospital, 6% were of non-profit organisation and 1% were of government. None of the 82 websites were HON certification, and the mean score of the item determining the general quality measure in DISCERN was 1.83 in a five-point scale. The mean of Ateşman readability formula value was calculated as 50.46 (±8.16). This value is defined as ‘moderately hard’ according to the readability scale. The average of Bezirci-Yılmaz new readability formula value is 13.85 (±3.48). This value is defined as 13th and 14th grade. ConclusionsThe quality of Internet-based health information about the voice is generally inadequate, and the sites examined in this study may be limited due to high readability levels. This may be a problem in people with poor literacy skills. For this reason, it is very important for speech and language therapists and other health professionals to evaluate and monitor the quality and readability of Internet-based information.

Assessing the quality, readability and reliability of online information on COVID-19

During a public health crisis, the dissemination of reliable information, advice and experts’ opinions is essential for improving public comprehension of potential or actual health threats and enables the public to take informed decisions about risk mitigation measures. This study aimed to assess the quality, reliability and readability of internet-based information on COVID-19 available on Brazil’ most used search engines. A total of 68 websites were selected through Google, Bing, and Yahoo. The websites content quality and reliability were evaluated using the DISCERN questionnaire, the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) criteria, and the presence of the Health on Net (HON) certification. Readability was assessed by the Flesch Reading Ease adapted to Brazilian Portuguese (FRE-BP). The web contents were considered moderate to low quality according to DISCERN and JAMA mean scores. Most of the sample presented very difficult reading levels and only 7.4% displayed HON certification. Websites of Governmental and health-related authorship nature showed lower JAMA mean scores and quality and readability measures did not correlate to the webpages content type. COVID-19 related contents available online were considered of low to moderate quality and not accessible to general population. These findings indicate the need for further efforts on improving the quality of health-related content on internet, especially during public health emergencies.

Quality and readability of internet-based information on halitosis

To evaluate quality and readability of Internet-based information on halitosis. An Internet search through 3 engines (Google, Yahoo, and Bing) was done with the terms ("bad breath," "halitosis," "oral malodor," "foul breath," "mouth malodor," "breath malodor," "fetor ex ore," "fetor oris," "ozostomia," and "stomatodysodia"). The first 50 websites from each engine resulting from each search term were screened. Included websites were evaluated using Health on the Net (HON) criteria, Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, DISCERN, Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP), Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score, and Flesch-Kincaid Grade level. A total of 101 websites were included. HON, DISCERN, EQIP, and FRE score were 42.9%, 37.6%, 37.4%, and 51.9% of the maximum score, respectively. Fewer than 50% of sites displayed attribution, disclosure, and currency according to JAMA benchmarks. HON score, DISCERN score, and EQIP score had significant correlation with each other and were significantly higher in sites displaying the HON seal. The current quality and readability of informative websites on halitosis are generally low and poorly organized. Clinicians should be able to assess the Internet-based information on halitosis, as well as give accurate advice and guide patients concerning this issue.