Setting the public agenda for online health search: A white paper and action agenda

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2004, Pages

  Greenberg, Liza ^a   D'Andrea, Guy ^a   Lorence, Dan ^b  

^a URAC   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Consumer participation; eHealth; Health services research; Information management; Internet; Patient education; Quality of health care

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; INTERNET; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; PUBLIC HEALTH; REVIEW; CONSUMER; HUMAN; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; STANDARD;

CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; HUMANS; INTERNET; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; PUBLIC SECTOR;

EID: 4844226037     PISSN: 14388871     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2196/jmir.6.2.e18     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Fox S, Fallows D. Internet health resources: health searches and email have become more commonplace, but there is room for improvement in searches and overall Internet access. Pew Internet & American Life Project Report 2003 Jul. URL: http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Health_Report_July_2003.pdf [accessed 2004 May 25]
2. US Department of Health and Human Services. Tracking healthy people 2010 (B11-6). Washington: US Government Printing Office; 2000.
3. Karp S, Monroe A. Quality of healthcare information on the Internet: caveat emptor still rules. Manag Care Q 2002;10(2):3-8.
4. Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, Algazy JI, Kravitz RL, Broder MS, et al. Health information on the Internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA 2001;285(20):2612-2621.
5. RAND Corporation. Proceed with caution: a report on the quality of health information on the internet. San Francisco, CA: Rand Corporation. Jun; 2001. Sponsored by the California Health Care Foundation. URL: http://www.chcf.org/ documents/consumer/ProceedWithCautionCompleteStudy.pdf [accessed 2004 May 25]
6. Lenhart A, Horrigan J, Rainie L, Allen K, Boyce A, Madden M, O'Grady E. The ever-shifting Internet population: a new look at internet access and the digital divide. Pew Internet & American Life Project Report URL: http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Shifting_Net_Pop_Report.pdf [accessed 2004 May 25]
7. Houston TK, Allison JJ. Users of Internet health information: differences by health status. J Med Internet Res 2002;4(2):e7.
8. Fox S. Search engines: a Pew Internet Project data memo. Pew Internet & American Life Project Report 2002 Jul. URL: http://www.pewinternet.org/ pdfs/PIP_Search_Engine_Data.pdf [accessed 2004 May 25]
9. Eysenbach G, Köhler C. Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ 2002 Mar 9;324(7337):573-577.
10. iProspect.com Inc. iProspect survey confirms internet users ignore Web sites without top search engine rankings. Watertown, MA: iProspect.com; 2002. URL: http://www.iprospect.com/web_site_promotion/press11142002.htm [accessed 2004 Apr 8]
11. Impicciatore P, Pandolfini C, Casella N, Bonati M. Reliability of health information for the public on the world wide web: A systematic survey of advice and managing fever in children at home. BMJ 1997 Jun 28;314(7098):1875-1879.
12. Zeng X, Parmanto B. Evaluation of web accessibility of consumer health information websites. Proceedings of the American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA) Symposium 2003.
13. Potts HW, Wyatt JC. Survey of doctors' experience of patients using the Internet. J Med Internet Res 2002;4(1):e5.
14. The Center for Information Therapy. Prescription strength information. URL: http://www.informationtherapy.org/ [accessed 2004 Apr 8]
15. Fogg BJ, Soohoo C, Danielson D, Marable L, Stanford J, Tauber E. How do people evaluate a web site's credibility? Stanford, CA: Stanford Persuasive Technology Lab. Oct; 2002. Sponsored by Consumer WebWatch. URL: http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/news/report3_credibilityresearch/ stanfordPTL_abstract.htm [accessed 2004 Apr 8]
16. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa E. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA 2002 May 22-29;287(20):2691-2700.
17. Griffiths K, Christensen H. Quality of web based information on treatment of depression: cross sectional survey. BMJ 2000 Dec 16;321(7275):1511-1515.
18. Meric F, Bernstam E, Mirza N, Hunt K, Ames F, Ross M. Breast cancer on the world wide web: cross sectional survey of quality of information and popularity of websites. BMJ 2002 Mar 9;324(7337):577-581.
19. Kunst H, Groot D, Latthe P, Latthe M, Khan KS. Accuracy of information on apparently credible websites: survey of five common health topics. BMJ 2002 Mar 9;324(7337):581-582.
20. ihealth Coalition. eHealth Code of Ethics. URL: http://www. ihealthcoalition.org/ethics/ethics.html [accessed 2004 Apr 8]
21. The American Medical Association. Guidelines for Medical and Health Information Sites on the Internet. URL: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/ category/1905.html#GUIDE [accessed 2004 Apr 8]
22. HON Project. Health On the Net Code of Conduct (HONcode). URL: http://www.hon.ch/Project/HONcode.html [accessed 2004 Apr 8]
23. URAC. URAC Health website Accreditation. URL: http:// websiteaccreditation.urac.org/ [accessed 2004 Apr 8]
24. Jadad A, Gagliardi A. Rating heath information on the Internet: navigating to knowledge or to Babel? JAMA 1998 Feb 25;279(8):611-614.
25. Gagliardi A, Jadad AR. Examination of instruments used to rate quality of health information on the internet: chronicle of a voyage with an unclear destination. BMJ 2002 Mar 9;324(7337):569-573.
26. Kim P, Eng TR, Deering MJ, Maxfield A. Published criteria for evaluating health related web sites: review. BMJ 1999 Mar 6;318(7184):647-649.
27. Wilson P. How to find the good and avoid the bad or ugly: a short guide to tools for rating quality of health information on the internet. BMJ 2002 Mar 9;324(7337):598-602.
28. National Library of Medicine. MEDLINEplus Guide to healthy web surfing. URL: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/healthywebsurfing.html [accessed 2004 May 25]
29. Mayer MA, Darmoni SJ, Fiene M, Köhler C, Roth-Berghofer TR, Eysenbach G. MedCIRCLE: collaboration for Internet rating, certification, labelling and evaluation of health information on the World-Wide-Web. Stud Health Technol Inform 2003;95:667-672.
30. Khopkar Y, Spink A, Giles C, Shah P, Debnath S. Search engine personalization: an exploratory study. First Monday 2003;8(7):1-23.
31. Wu G, Li J. Comparing Web search engine performance in searching consumer health information: evaluation and recommendations. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1999 Oct;87(4):456-461.
32. Introna L, Nissenbaum H. Defining the Web: the politics of search engines. IEEE Computer 2000;33(1):54-62.
33. Marable L. False oracles: consumer reaction to learning the truth about how search engines work. 2003 Jun.
34. Richardson C, Resnick P, Hansen D, Derry H, Rideout H. oes pornography-blocking software block access to health information on the Internet? JAMA 2002 Dec 11;288(22):2887-2894.
35. US Dept. of Health and Human Services. Healthfinder: your guide to reliable health information.
36. Brown P. WHO calls for a health domain name to help consumers. BMJ 2002 Mar 9;324(7337):566.