A critical appraisal of internet resources on colorectal cancer

Colorectal Disease

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 217-223

  John, Ajo K ^a,b  

^a PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b Lynebank Hospital   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Colorectal neoplasms; Critique; Evaluation studies; Health informatics; Information science (medical); Internet; Qualitative evaluation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COCHRANE LIBRARY; COLORECTAL CANCER; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HEALTH PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; INTERNET; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; PATIENT CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH;

COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; INFORMATION SERVICES; INTERNET;

EID: 33644928064     PISSN: 14628910     EISSN: 14631318     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2005.00882.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. BIOME. (2004) How to evaluate an internet based information source [WWW document]. URL http://www.biome.ac.uk/guidelines/eval/howto.html (accessed June 2004).
2. DISCERN. (2000) The DISCERN instrument for assessing consumer health information [WWW document]. URL http://www.discern.org.uk/ discerninstrument.htm (accessed June 2004).
3. Wyatt JC. Commentary. measuring quality and impact of the World Wide Web. Br Med J 1997; 314: 1879.
4. Standler RB (2004) Evaluating credibility of information on the internet [WWW document]. URL http://www.rbs0.com/credible.pdf (accessed June 2004).
5. McGill University Health Sciences Library and Osler Library of History of Medicine. (2004) Internet resources selection criteria [WWW document]. URL http://www.health.library.mcgill.ca/resource/criteria.htm (accessed July 2004).
6. Health on the Net Foundation. (2004) Health on the Net (HON) foundation code of conduct for medical and health websites [WWW document]. URL http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Conduct.html (accessed June 2004).
7. Health Summit Working Group (1998) Criteria for assessing the quality of health information on the internet- policy paper [WWW document]. URL http://www.hitiweb.mitretek.org/docs/policy.html (accessed June 2004).
8. Risk A, Dzenowagis J. Review of internet health information quality initiatives. JMIR 2001; 3: E28 [WWW document]. URL http://www.jmir.org// 4/e28/ (accessed July 2004).
9. Smith A. (1997) Criteria for evaluation of internet information resources [WWW document]. URL http://www.vuw.ac.nz/staff/alastair_smith/evaln/index.htm (accessed July 2004).
10. Leibermann J. (2000) Evaluating health websites [WWW document]. URL http://www.nnlm.gov/scr/conhlth/evalsite.htm (accessed July 2004).
11. Kirk EE. (2003) Evaluating information found on the internet [WWW document]. URL http://www.library.jhu.edu/elp/useit/evaluate/index.html (accessed August 2004).
12. Tillman HN. (2003) Evaluating quality on the net [WWW document]. URL http://www.hopetillman.com/findqual.html (accessed August 2004).
13. Cornell University Library. (2004) Critically analysing information sources [WWW document]. URL http://www.library.cornell.edu/olinuris/ref/ research/skill26.htm. (accessed October 2004).
14. General Medical Council. (2001) Good Medical Practice. General Medical Council, London.
15. General Medical Council. (1999) The Doctor as Teacher. General Medical Council, London.