Reliability and type of consumer health documents on the World Wide Web: An annotation study

Journal of Biomedical Semantics

Volumn 2, Issue 3, 2011, Pages

  Martin, Melanie J ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84886252484     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411480     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/2041-1480-2-S3-S5     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Impicciatore P, Pandolfini C, Casella N, Bonati M: Reliability of health information for the public on the World Wide Web: systematic survey of advice on managing fever in children at home. BMJ. 1997, 314: 1875-10.1136/bmj.314.7098.1875.
2. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa E-R: Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the World Wide Web: a systematic review. JAMA. 2002, 287 (20): 2691-2700. 10.1001/jama.287.20.2691.
3. Kaicker J, Debono VB, Dang W, Buckley N, Thabane L: Assessment of the quality and variability of health information on chronic pain websites using the DISCERN instrument. BMC Med. 2010, 8: 59-10.1186/1741-7015-8-59.
4. Martin MJ: Reliability and verification of natural language text on the World Wide Web. Proceedings of the 27th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval: 5 - 29 July 2004; Sheffield, United Kingdom. Edited by: Sanderson M, Järvelin K, Allan J, Bruza P. 2004, New York: ACM, 603-603.
5. Cooke A: A Guide to finding quality information on the Internet: selection and evaluation strategies. 2001, London: Library Association Publishing, second
6. Alexander JE, Tate MA: Web wisdom: how to evaluate and create information quality on the Web. 1999, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates
7. Fallis D, Frické M: Indicators of accuracy of consumer health information on the Internet. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2002, 9 (1): 73-79. 10.1136/jamia.2002.0090073.
8. Danielson DR: Web credibility. Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction. Edited by: Ghaoui C. 2005, Hershey, PA: Idea Group, 713-721.
9. Cohen J: A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1960, 20: 34-46.
10. Hripcsak G, Rothschild AS: Agreement, the F-measure, and reliability in information retrieval. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005, 12 (3): 296-298. 10.1197/jamia.M1733.
11. Discern online: quality criteria for consumer health information. [ http://www.discern.org.uk/ ]
12. Health information on the Internet: a checklist to help you judge which websites to trust. [ http://www.urac.org ]
13. Price SL, Hersh WR: Filtering Web pages for quality indicators: an empirical approach to finding high quality consumer health information on the World Wide Web. Proceedings of American Medical Informatics Association Symp.: 6-10 November 1999; Washington DC. Edited by: Lorenzi N. 1999, Philadelphia: Hanley & Belfus Inc., 911-915.
14. Wiebe JM, Bruce RF, O'Hara TP: Development and use of a gold-standard data set for subjectivity classifications. Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Association For Computational Linguistics on Computational Linguistics 20-26 June 1999; College Park, Maryland. 1999, Morristown, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics, 246-253.
15. Somasundaran S, Ruppenhofer J, Wiebe J: Discourse level opinion relations: an annotation study. Association for Computational Linguistics19-20 June 2008; Columbus, Ohio. Edited by: Schlangen D, Hockey BA. 2008, Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 129-137.
16. Artstein R, Poesio M: Inter-coder agreement for computational linguistics. Computational Linguistics. 2008, 34 (4): 555-596. 10.1162/coli.07-034-R2.
17. Beigman Klebanov B, Beigman E: From annotator agreement to noise models. Computational Linguistics. 2009, 35 (4): 495-503. 10.1162/coli.2009.35.4.35402.