Readability Of Internet 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.

What Our Patients and Their Families Are Reading: Quality and Readability of Internet Information About Electroconvulsive Therapy.

The Internet is now more widely used than before by psychiatric patients and their families to search for medical conditions and treatments. To our knowledge, no study has addressed the quality and readability of online information about electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). We aimed to examine the quality and readability of English-language Internet information related to ECT. An advanced search of Internet Web sites containing information about ECT was conducted by using the search term "ECT or electroconvulsive therapy." The resulting Web sites were categorized into 1 of 3 categories (commercial, nonprofit, or professional organizations). Their quality was evaluated using Health on the Net code certification, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, and the DISCERN tool. The readability of the Web sites was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Formula, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, and Gunning Fog indexes. A total of 86 Web sites were included in the analysis. Of all these Web sites, 18 (20.9%) had a Health on the Net code certificate, and 16 (18.6%) were accepted as high quality (JAMA total score ≥3). The commercial Web sites had significantly lower DISCERN and JAMA benchmark scores compared with the other Web sites. A total of 30.23% of all the Web sites reached the recommended readability level (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Formula ≤ 8). Moreover, only 4 scored at the grade 5 to 6 reading level, which is considered ideal for patient educational materials. Our study indicates that both the quality and readability of online information about ECT are not at the desired level. Physicians, patients, and their families should consider this failure in relation to online information about ECT. In addition, Web site creators and health authorities should be aware of their responsibilities for providing quality and readable health information to the public.

Quality and readability of online patient information on the left ventricular assist device.

As patients seek online health information to supplement their medical decision-making, the aim of this study is to assess the quality and readability of internet information on the left ventricular assist device (LVAD). Three online search engines (Google, Bing, and Yahoo) were searched for "LVAD" and "Left ventricular assist device." Included websites were classified as academic, foundation/advocacy, hospital-affiliated, commercial, or unspecified. The quality of information was assessed using the JAMA benchmark criteria (0-4), DISCERN tool (16-80), and the presence of Health On the Net code (HONcode) accreditation. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease score. A total of 38 unique websites were included. The average JAMA and DISCERN scores of all websites were 0.82 ± 1.11 and 52.45 ± 13.51, respectively. Academic sites had a significantly lower JAMA mean score than commercial (p< 0.001) and unspecified (p< 0.001) websites, as well as a significantly lower DISCERN, mean score than commercial sites (p= 0.002). HONcode certification was present in 6 (15%) websites analyzed, which had significantly higher JAMA (p < 0.001) and DISCERN (p < 0.016) mean scores than sites without HONcode certification. Readability was fairly difficult and at the level of high school students. The quality of online information on the LVAD is variable, and overall readability exceeds the recommended level for the public. Patients accessing online information on the LVAD should be referred to sites with HONcode accreditation. Academic institutions must provide higher quality online patient literature on LVADs.

Quality and readability of internet information about stuttering

PurposeWe examined the quality and readability of English-language Internet information about stuttering and evaluated the results considering recommendations by experts in health literacy. MethodA search of Internet websites containing information about stuttering was conducted. Three key words (i.e., stuttering, stammering, speech disfluency) were entered into five country-specific versions of the most commonly used Internet search engine. A total of 79 websites were assessed. Their origin (commercial, non-profit, government, personal or university), quality [Health On the Net (HON) certification and DISCERN scores], and readability [Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Formula (F-KGL), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG)] were assessed. ResultsOf the 79 websites, 38 % were of commercial, 42 % were of nonprofit organization, 15 % were of government and 5% were of university origins, respectively. Only 13 % had obtained HON certification and the mean DISCERN scores was 3.10 in a 5-point scale. The mean reading grade levels were at 13th and 14th grade and 100 % of the websites exceeded the recommended 5th to 6th reading grade level for health information. ConclusionsThe quality of Internet-based health information about the treatment of stuttering is generally adequate, but actual usability of the sites examined in this study may be limited due to poor readability levels. This is problematic in persons with poor literacy skills. Since the Internet can be readily accessed as a valuable consumer information resource, speech-language pathologists and other healthcare professionals have an opportunity to direct consumers to websites that provide readable information of good quality.

Evaluating the Quality and Readability of Internet Information on Meningiomas

The Internet is a highly powerful resource for patients and provides an extensive amount of information on medical conditions. It is therefore important that the information accessible is accurate, up to date, and at an appropriate comprehensive level for the general public. This article aims to evaluate the quality of patient information on meningiomas. The term meningioma was searched using the following search engines: Google, Bing, Yahoo, Ask, and AOL. The top 100 meningioma Web sites were analyzed for readability using the Flesch Reading Ease score and the Flesch-Kincaid grade level. The quality of each Web page was assessed with the DISCERN instrument and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Clear Communication Index (CCI). The quality of information on the Internet on meningiomas is highly variable. The overall mean Flesch Reading Ease score was 43.1 (standard deviation= 13.3) and the mean Flesch-Kincaid grade of all the Web sites was 11.2 (standard deviation= 2.3). This finding suggests that the information is on average difficult to read. Only one Web site was at the recommended seventh-grade level and the remainder were above this grade. Only one third of the Web pages had Health On the Net Code of Conduct or The Information Standard certification and were found to be significantly of higher quality: DISCERN (P= 0.022) and CDC CCI (P= 0.027). More than 50% of the Web sites had significantly poor or average DISCERN scores and only 2 Web sites fulfilled the CDC CCI criteria. It is recommended that clinicians personally research material for their patients to be able to guide them to reliable and accurate Web sites. It is alsoencouraged to become Health On the Net Code of Conduct/The Information Standard certified because this may indicate information of high quality. In addition, it is also recommended that authors of existing information assess the quality of their online health information against the CDC CCI criteria.

The quality and readability of internet information regarding clavicle fractures.

The internet has become a major source of health information for patients. However, there has been little scrutiny of health information available on the internet to the public. Our objectives were to evaluate the quality and readability of information available on the internet regarding clavicle fractures and whether they changed with academic affiliation of the website or with complexity of the search term. Through a prospective evaluation of 3 search engines using 3 different search terms of varying complexity ("broken collarbone," "collarbone fracture," and "clavicle fracture"), we evaluated 91 website hits for quality and readability. Websites were specifically analyzed by search term and by website type. Information quality was evaluated on a four-point scale, and information readability was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid score for reading grade level. The average quality score for our website hits was low, and the average reading grade level was far above the recommended level. Academic websites offered significantly higher quality information, whereas commercial websites offered significantly lower quality information. The use of more complex search terms yielded information of higher reading grade level but not higher quality. Current internet information regarding clavicle fractures is of low quality and low readability. Higher quality information utilizing more accessible language on clavicle fractures is needed on the internet. It is important to be aware of the information accessible to patients prior to their presentation to our clinics. Patients should be advised to visit websites with academic affiliations and to avoid commercial websites.

The Quality and Readability of Information Available on the Internet Regarding Lumbar Fusion.

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.

Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Biopsy of the Prostate: Is the Information Accessible, Usable, Reliable and Readable?

Background/Aims: To evaluate the accessibility, usability, reliability and readability of Internet information regarding transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided biopsy of the prostate. Materials and Methods: The terms “prostate biopsy”, “TRUS biopsy” and “transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate” were separately entered into the each of the top 5 most accessed Internet search engines. Websites were evaluated for accessibility, usability and reliability using the LIDA tool - a validated tool for the assessment of health related websites. Website readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score and the Flesch Kincaid Grade Level. Results: Following the application of exclusion criteria, 82 unique websites were analyzed. There was a significant difference in scores depending on authorship categories (p ≤ 0.001), with health related charity websites scoring highest (mean 122.29 ± 13.98) and non-academic affiliated institution websites scoring lowest (mean 87 ± 19.76). The presence of advertisements on a website was associated with a lower mean overall LIDA tool score (p = 0.024). Only a single website adhered to the National Institutes for Health recommendations on readability. Conclusions: This study demonstrates variability in the quality of information available to Internet users regarding TRUS biopsies. Collaboration of website design and clinical acumen are necessary to develop appropriate websites for patient benefit.

Readability of Internet Information on Hearing: Systematic Literature Review.

This systematic literature review asks the following question: “ What is the readability of Internet information on hearing that people with hearing impairment and their significant others can access in the context of their hearing care?” Searches were completed in three databases: CINAHL, PubMed, and Scopus. Seventy-eight records were identified and systematically screened for eligibility: 8 records were included that contained data on the readability of Internet information on hearing that people with hear ing impairment and their significant others can access in the context of their hearing care. Records reported mean readability levels from 9 to over 14. In other words, people with hearing impairment and their significant others need 9 to 14 years of education to read and understand Internet information on hearing that they access in the context of their hearing care. The poor readability of Internet information on hearing has been well documented; it is time to focus on valid and sustainable initiatives that address this problem.

A survey of the quality of web based information on the treatment of schizophrenia and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

To systematically assess the quality, accountability and readability of Internet information on the treatment of schizophrenia and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), using a standardized pro forma. We analysed the 20 most highly ranked pages on the treatment of ADHD and schizophrenia, identified by five common Internet search engines. There was little overlap in the sites identified by different search engines. In the case of schizophrenia, one site was identified three times and another eight sites twice; while for ADHD four sites were identified twice. Accountability (Silberg score), presentation and readability, as assessed by the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level score, were poor. Mean Silberg, presentation and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level scores were 3.2 (range 0-9) out of 9, 1.9 (range 0-4) out of 4, and 11.5 (range 6.5-12.25), respectively. There was no statistical difference in scores between the two diagnoses. Depending on the recommendation, agreement with evidence-based practice for schizophrenia ranged from only 2 to 55% (mean = 2.8 (range 0-9) out of 12), while that for ADHD was from 14 to 54% (mean = 1.6 (range 0-6) out of 6). Only 50% of the sites advised readers to clarify information with an appropriate health professional. Interrater reliability in pro forma scores for schizophrenia and ADHD was high (r = 0.96 and 0.95, respectively, p < 0.0001). Sites in the top 10% of scores were significantly more likely to be owned by an organization or have an editorial board than those in the bottom 10%. The Internet contains misleading information on both schizophrenia and ADHD. The methodology used in this paper could be adapted for other psychiatric conditions.