Evaluation of web-based osteoporosis educational materials

Journal of Women's Health

Volumn 14, Issue 10, 2005, Pages 936-942

  Wallace, Lorraine S ^a   Turner, Lori W ^b   Ballard, Joyce E ^c   Keenum, Amy J ^a   Weiss, Barry D ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT TYLER   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEALTH EDUCATION; HEALTH PROMOTION; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTERNET; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; OSTEOPOROSIS; PATIENT EDUCATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

COMPREHENSION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNET; LIBRARY MATERIALS; OSTEOPOROSIS; OSTEOPOROSIS, POSTMENOPAUSAL; PATIENT EDUCATION; UNITED STATES; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

EID: 31344433417     PISSN: 15409996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2005.14.936     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Looker AC, Johnston CC, Wahner HW, et al. Prevalence of low femoral bone density in older U.S. women from NHANES III. J Bone Miner Res 1995;10:796.
2. Riggs BL, Melton LJ. The worldwide problem of osteoporosis: Insights afforded by epidemiology. Bone 1995;17:505S.
3. Cummings SR, Melton LJ. Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures. Lancet 2002;359:1761.
4. NIH Consensus Development Panel on Osteoporosis Prevention, Diagnosis, and Therapy. JAMA 2001;285: 785.
5. Curry LC, Hogstel MO. Risk status related to knowledge of osteoporosis in older women. J Women Aging 2001;13:71.
6. Terrio K, Auld GW. Osteoporosis knowledge, calcium intake, and weight-bearing physical activity in three age groups of women. J Community Health 2002;27: 307.
7. Wallace LS. Osteoporosis prevention in college women: Application of the expanded health belief model. Am J Health Behav 2002;26:163.
8. Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice RL, et al. Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: Principal results from the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002;288:321.
9. Wallace LS, Ballard JE. Osteoporosis coverage in selected women's magazines and newspapers, 1998-2001. Am J Health Behav 2003;27:75.
10. Thomas LG, Corwin EJ. The readability of printed education materials regarding hormone replacement therapy. J Am Acad Nurse Pract 1998;10:447.
11. Eysenbach G, Kohler C. What is the prevalence of health-related searches on the World Wide Web? Qualitative and quantitative analysis of search engine queries on the internet. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2003:225.
12. Eysenbach G, Kohler C. Health-related searches on the internet. JAMA 2004;291:2946.
13. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Available at www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Vital_Decisions_May2002.pdf
14. Eysenbach GD, Powell J, Kuss O, Eun-Ryoung S. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the World Wide Web. JAMA 2000;113:2691.
15. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet. JAMA 1997;277:1244.
16. Friedman DB, Hoffman-Goetz G, Arocha JF. Readability of cancer information on the internet. J Cancer Educ 2004;19:117.
17. Kurec S, Mastilica M, Pavlekovic G, Kovacic L. Readability of patient information on diabetes on Croatian web sites. Stud Health Technol Inform 2002;90:128.
18. Wallace LS, Lennon ES. American Academy of Family Physicians patient education materials: Can patients read them? Fam Med 2004;36:571.
19. Doak CG, Doak LG, Root JH. Teaching patients with low literacy skills. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott Company, 1996.
20. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R. DISCERN: An instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health 1999;53: 105.
21. Rees CE, Ford JE, Sheard CE. Patient information leaflets for prostate cancer: Which leaflets should healthcare professionals recommend? Patient Educ Couns 2003;49:263.
22. Kaphingst KA, Rudd RE, DeJong W, et al. Literacy demands of product information to supplement television direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertisements. Patient Educ Couns 2004;55:293.
23. Wallace LS, Rogers ES, Turner LW, et al. Suitability of over-the-counter written supplemental materials available on the Internet. Am J Health Syst Pharm In press.
24. Sullivan D. Nielsen Net Ratings search engine ratings. Available at searchenginewatch.com/reports/article.php/2156451
25. Sullivan D. Buying your way in: Search engine advertising chart. Available at searchenginewatch.com/webmasters/article.php/2167941
26. Eysenbach G, Kohler C. How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the World Wide Web? A qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ 2002;324:573.
27. Peterson G, Aslani P, Williams PA. How do consumers search for and appraise information on medicines on the Internet? A qualitative study using focus groups. J Med Internet Res 2003;5:e33.
28. Fry E. Fry's readability graph: Clarifications, validity and extensions to level 17. J Reading 1977;21:242.
29. DISCERN Online. Available at www.discern.org.uk
30. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33: 159.
31. Kirsch I, Jungeblut A, Jenkins L, Kolstad A. Adult literacy in America: A first look at the results of the national adult literacy survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, 1993.
32. Redman BK. The process of patient education, 8th ed. St. Louis: Mosby Year Book, Inc, 1997.
33. Calderon JL, Zadshir A, Norris K. Structure and content of chronic kidney disease information on the world wide web: Barriers to public understanding of a pandemic. Nephrol News Issues 2004;18:76, 78, 81.
34. Weintraub D, Maliski SL, Fink A, et al. Suitability of prostate cancer education materials: Applying a standardized assessment tool to currently available materials. Patient Educ Couns, 2004;55:275.
35. Weiss BD. Health literacy: A manual for clinicians. Chicago: American Medical Association Foundation, 2003.
36. U.S. Department of Commerce. A nation online: How Americans are expanding their use of the internet. Available at www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/index.html
37. Kaiser Family Foundation. E-health and the elderly: How seniors use the Internet for health information. Available at