Assessment of the quality and variability of health information on chronic pain websites using the DISCERN instrument

BMC Medicine

Volumn 8, Issue , 2010, Pages

  Kaicker, Jatin ^a   Debono, Victoria B ^a   Dang, Wilfred ^a   Buckley, Norman ^a   Thabane, Lehana ^b,c  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTHRITIS; ARTICLE; BACKACHE; CHRONIC PAIN; ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE; FIBROMYALGIA; HUMAN; INTERNET; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MULTIMEDIA; ONLINE SYSTEM; PAIN ASSESSMENT; QUALITY CONTROL; QUESTIONNAIRE; READING; CHRONIC DISEASE; COMPREHENSION; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMATION SERVICE; METHODOLOGY; PAIN; PATIENT EDUCATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; STANDARD;

CHRONIC DISEASE; COMPREHENSION; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMATION SERVICES; INTERNET; PAIN; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

EID: 77957735807     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17417015     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-8-59     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa ER. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA 2002, 20:2691-2700.
2. U.S Department of Commerce-National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). Falling through the Net: Toward Digital Inclusion- A Report on Americans' Access to Technology Tools. , http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fttn00/falling.htm
3. Cline RJ, Haynes KM. Consumer health information seeking on the Internet: the state of the art. Health Educ Res 2001, 6:671-692.
4. U.S Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use Of The Internet. , http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/nationonline_020502.htm
5. Miniwatts Marketing Group, World Internet Users and Population Stats. , http://www.Internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
6. Statistics Canada, Canadian Internet Use Survey-2009. , http://www.statcan.gc.ca
7. Maloney S, Ilic D, Green S. Accessibility, nature and quality of health information on the Internet: a survey on osteoarthritis. Rheumatology 2005, 3:382-385.
8. Pew Internet and American Life Project, The online health care revolution: How the Web helps Americans take better care of themselves. , http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2000/The-Online-Health-Care-Revolution.aspx
9. Moody EM, Clemens KK, Storsley L, Waterman A, Parikh CR, Garg AX, . Donor Nephrectomy Outcomes Research (Donor) Network Improving on-line information for potential living kidney donors. Kidney Int 2007, 10:1062-1070. Donor Nephrectomy Outcomes Research (Donor) Network.
10. Henry JL. The need for knowledge translation in chronic pain. Pain Res Manag 2008, 6:465-476.
11. Statistics Canada, National Population Health Survey-1994/1995. , http://www.statcan.gc.ca
12. Stewart WF, Ricci JA, Chee E, Morganstein D. Lost productive work time costs from health conditions in the United States: results from the American Productivity Audit. J Occup Environ Med 2003, 12:1234-1246.
13. De Boer MJ, Versteegen GJ, van Wijhe M. Patients' use of the Internet for pain-related medical information. Patient Educ Couns 2007, 1:86-97.
14. Corcoran TB, Haigh F, Seabrook A, Schug SA. The quality of internet-sourced information for patients with chronic pain is poor. Clin J Pain 2009, 25:617-623. 10.1097/AJP.0b013e3181a5b5d5, 19692804.
15. Khazaal Y, Chatton A, Cochand S, Coquard O, Fernandez S, Khan R, Billieux J, Zullino D. Brief DISCERN, six questions for the evaluation of evidence-based content of health-related websites. Patient Educ Couns 2009, 1:33-37.
16. Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, Algazy JI, Kravitz RL, Broder MS, Kanouse DE, Muñoz JA, Puyol JA, Lara M, Watkins KE, Yang H, McGlynn EA. Health information on the Internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA 2001, 20:2612-2621.
17. Batchelor JM, Ohya Y. Use of the DISCERN instrument by patients and health professionals to assess information resources on treatments for asthma and atopic dermatitis. Allergol Int 2009, 1:141-145.
18. Washington TA, Fanciullo GJ, Sorensen JA, Baird JC. Quality of Chronic Pain Websites. Pain Medicine 2008, 9:86-97.
19. Sullivan D, Nielsen net ratings search engine ratings. , http://searchenginewatch.com
20. Flesch R. A new readability yardstick. J Appl Psychol 1948, 3:221-233.
21. Food and Drug Administration. How to Evaluate Health Information on the Internet. , http://www.fda.gov
22. Charnock D. The DISCERN Handbook 1998, Abingdon, Oxford: Radcliffe Medical Press.
23. Flesch-Kincade. Flesch 2.0 [Software]. 2007,
24. Sim J, Wright CC. The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther 2005, 3:257-268.
25. MedCalc Software MedCalc (Version 11.2). 1993, MedCalc Software.
26. 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, 2:105-111.
27. Davis TC, Crouch MA, Wills G, Miller S, Abdehou DM. The gap between patient reading comprehension and the readability of patient education materials. J Fam Pract 1990, 5:533-538.
28. Boyer C, Selby M, Scherrer JR, Appel RD. The Health On the Net Code of Conduct for medical and health Websites. Comput Biol Med 1998, 5:603-610.
29. Lorence D, Abraham J. A study of undue pain and surfing: using hierarchical criteria to assess website quality. Health Informatics J 2008, 3:155-173.
30. Greene DL, Appel AJ, Reinert SE, Palumbo MA. Lumbar disc herniation: evaluation of information on the internet. Spine 2005, 7:826-829.
31. Li L, Irvin E, Guzman J, Bombardier C. Surfing for back pain patients: the nature and quality of back pain information on the Internet. Spine 2001, 5:545-557.
32. Culver M, Chadwick A. Internet information on rheumatoid arthritis: an evaluation. Musculoskeletal Care 2005, 1:33-43.
33. Newman MA, Ziebland S, Barker KL. Patients' views of a multimedia resource featuring experiences of rheumatoid arthritis: pilot evaluation of. Health Informatics J 2009, 2:147-159., http://www.healthtalkonline.org
34. Bohacek L, Gomez M, Fish JS. An evaluation of internet sites for burn scar management. J Burn Care Rehabil 2003, 4:246-251.
35. Pandolfini C, Impicciatore P, Bonati M. Parents on the web: risks for quality management of cough in children. Pediatrics 2000, 1:e1.