Quality of online otolaryngology health information

被引:15
作者
Biggs, T. C. [1 ]
Jayakody, N. [2 ]
Best, K. [3 ]
King, E. V. [1 ]
机构
[1] Poole NHS Fdn Trust, Dept ENT Surg, Poole BH15 2JB, Dorset, England
[2] Salisbury NHS Fdn Trust, Dept ENT Head & Neck Surg, Salisbury, Wilts, England
[3] Queen Elizabeth Hosp Birmingham, Dept ENT Head & Neck Surg, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
关键词
Otolaryngology; Internet; Health Resources; Cancer; INTERNET INFORMATION; WIKIPEDIA; GOOGLE;
D O I
10.1017/S0022215118000774
中图分类号
R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100213 ;
摘要
Objective. Up to 70 per cent of the population search online for medical or health-related information. This study aimed to assess the quality of online health resources available to educate patients on a variety of otolaryngological conditions. Methods. Two clinicians independently analysed the quality and content of educational websites (patient.co.uk and wikipedia.org) for common and uncommon diagnoses, with cancerresearchuk.org also used to assess two head and neck cancers. Results. Cancerresearchuk.org, followed by patient.co.uk, scored most highly in their ability to inform readers on a selection of otolaryngological conditions. Although wikipedia.org was less likely to include all relevant information and was more difficult to read, it still provided mostly accurate information. Conclusion. Where possible, patients should be advised to access professionally maintained health information websites (patient.co.uk and cancerresearchuk.org). However, wikipedia.org can provide adequate information, although it lacks depth and can be difficult to understand.
引用
收藏
页码:560 / 563
页数:4
相关论文
共 14 条
  • [1] Why Medical Schools Should Embrace Wikipedia: Final-Year Medical Student Contributions to Wikipedia Articles for Academic Credit at One School
    Azzam, Amin
    Bresler, David
    Leon, Armando
    Maggio, Lauren
    Whitaker, Evans
    Heilman, James
    Orlowitz, Jake
    Swisher, Valerie
    Rasberry, Lane
    Otoide, Kingsley
    Trotter, Fred
    Ross, Will
    Mccue, Jack D.
    [J]. ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 2017, 92 (02) : 193 - 200
  • [2] References that anyone can edit: review of Wikipedia citations in peer reviewed health science literature
    Bould, M. Dylan
    Hladkowicz, Emily S.
    Pigford, Ashlee-Ann E.
    Ufholz, Lee-Anne
    Postonogova, Tatyana
    Shin, Eunkyung
    Boet, Sylvain
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2014, 348
  • [3] Evaluating the quality and readability of Internet information sources regarding the treatment of swallowing disorders
    Ferster, Ashley P. O'Connell
    Hu, Amanda
    [J]. ENT-EAR NOSE & THROAT JOURNAL, 2017, 96 (03) : 128 - +
  • [4] Flint PW., 2010, CUMMINGS OTOLARYNGOL, V5th
  • [5] Gleeson M., 2008, SCOTT BROWNS OTORHIN, V7th
  • [6] Consulting Dr. Google: Quality of Online Resources About Tympanostomy Tube Placement
    Harris, Vandra C.
    Links, Anne R.
    Hong, Paul
    Walsh, Jonathan
    Schoo, Desi P.
    Tunkel, David E.
    Stewart, Charles M.
    Boss, Emily F.
    [J]. LARYNGOSCOPE, 2018, 128 (02) : 496 - 501
  • [7] Wikipedia and Medicine: Quantifying Readership, Editors, and the Significance of Natural Language
    Heilman, James M.
    West, Andrew G.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2015, 17 (03)
  • [8] Wikipedia - challenges and new horizons in enhancing medical education
    Herbert, Verena G.
    Frings, Andreas
    Rehatschek, Herwig
    Richard, Gisbert
    Leithner, Andreas
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2015, 15
  • [9] How Good Is Google? The Quality of Otolaryngology Information on the Internet
    Pusz, Max D.
    Brietzke, Scott E.
    [J]. OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY, 2012, 147 (03) : 462 - 465
  • [10] Glue ear: how good is the information on the World Wide Web?
    Ritchie, L.
    Tornari, C.
    Patel, P. M.
    Lakhani, R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF LARYNGOLOGY AND OTOLOGY, 2016, 130 (02) : 157 - 161