Quality of information on the internet related to bladder pain syndrome: A systematic review of the evidence

International Urogynecology Journal and Pelvic Floor Dysfunction

Volumn 24, Issue 8, 2013, Pages 1257-1262

  Tirlapur, S A ^a,b,c   Leiu, C ^a   Khan, K S ^a,b  

^a QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL LONDON HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Accuracy; Bladder pain syndrome; Credibility; Internet; Interstitial cystitis; Readability

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; BLADDER PAIN SYNDROME; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; CYSTALGIA; HUMAN; INTERNET; INTERSTITIAL CYSTITIS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; PATIENT EDUCATION; PELVIC PAIN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; QUESTIONNAIRE; READING; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

DISEASE MANAGEMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; PAIN MANAGEMENT; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PELVIC PAIN; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; URINARY BLADDER DISEASES;

EID: 84892737546     PISSN: 09373462     EISSN: 14333023     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-013-2091-1     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. van de Merwe JP, Nordling J, Bouchelouche P, Bouchelouche K, Cervigni M, Daha LK et al (2008) Diagnostic criteria, classification, and nomenclature for painful bladder syndrome/interstitial cystitis: An ESSIC proposal. Eur Urol 53(1):60-67
2. Hanno PM, Burks DA, Clemens JQ, Dmochowski RR, Erickson D, Fitzgerald MP et al (2011) AUA guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome. J Urol 185(6):2162-2170
3. McMullan M (2006) Patients using the internet to obtain health information: How this affects the patient-health professional relationship. Patient Educ Couns 63(1-2):24-28
4. Benigeri M, Pluye P (2003) Shortcomings of health information on the internet. Health Promot Int 18(4):381-386
5. Temml C, Wehrberger C, Riedl C, Ponholzer A, Marszalek M, Madersbacher S (2007) Prevalence and correlates for interstitial cystitis symptoms in women participating in a health screening project. Eur Urol 51(3):803-808, discussion 809
6. Chien PF, Khan KS, Siassakos D (2012) Registration of systematic reviews: PROSPERO. BJOG 119(8):903-905
7. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 62(10):e1-e34
8. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA (1997) Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the internet: Caveant lector et viewor-let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA 277(15):1244-1245
9. Latthe PM, Latthe M, Khan KS (2000) Quality of medical information about menorrhagia on the worldwide web. BJOG 107(1):39-43
10. Winker MA, Flanagin A, Chi-Lum B, White J, Andrews K, Kennett RL et al (2000) Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet: Principles governing AMA web sites. Am Med Assoc JAMA 283(12):1600-1606
11. Groot D, ter Riet G, Khan KS, Misso K (2001) Comparison of search strategies and quality of medical information of the internet: A study relating to ankle sprain. Injury 32(6):473-476
12. Kunst H, Groot D, Latthe PM, Latthe M, Khan KS (2002) Accuracy of information on apparently credible websites: Survey of five common health topics. BMJ 324(7337):581-582
13. Murphy R, Frost S, Webster P, Schmidt U (2004) An evaluation of web-based information. Int J Eat Disord 35(2):145-154
14. Ambre J, Guard R, Perveiler FM, Renner J, Rippen H (1997) White paper: Criteria for assessing the quality of health information on the internet
15. Hanno P, Lin A, Nordling J, Nyberg L, van Ophoven A, Ueda T et al (2010) Bladder pain syndrome committee of the international consultation on incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 29(1):191-198
16. Bernstam EV, Shelton DM, Walji M, Meric-Bernstam F (2005) Instruments to assess the quality of health information on the world wide web: What can our patients actually use? Int J Med Inform 74(1):13-19
17. Routh JC, Gong EM, Cannon GM, Nelson CP (2011) Does a controversial topic affect the quality of urologic information on the internet? Urology 78(5):1051-1056
18. Kaicker J, Debono VB, Dang W, Buckley N, Thabane L (2010) Assessment of the quality and variability of health information on chronic pain websites using the DISCERN instrument. BMC Med 8:59
19. Henderson EM, Rosser BA, Keogh E, Eccleston C (2012) Internet sites offering adolescents help with headache, abdominal pain, and dysmenorrhoea: A description of content, quality, and peer interactions. J Pediatr Psychol 37(3):262-271
20. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159-174
21. Davies L, Ganger K, Drummond M, Saunders D, Beard R (1992) The economic burden of intractable gynaecological pain. J Obstet Gynaecol 12 [Suppl 2]:S46-S54
22. Henry JL (2008) The need for knowledge translation in chronic pain. Pain Res Manag 13(6):465-476
23. Corcoran TB, Haigh F, Seabrook A, Schug SA (2009) The quality of internet-sourced information for patients with chronic pain is poor. Clin J Pain 25(7):617-623
24. de Boer MJ, Versteegen GJ, van Wijhe M (2007) Patients' use of the Internet for pain-related medical information. Patient Educ Couns 68(1):86-97
25. Sajadi KP, Goldman HB (2011) Social networks lack useful content for incontinence. Urology 78(4):764-767
26. Clemens JO, Calhoun EA, Litwin MS, Collins MM (2008) Primary care physician practice patterns in the management of interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome. Neurourol Urodyn 27(2):140-141
27. Cline RJ, Haynes KM (2001) Consumer health information seeking on the internet: The state of the art. Health Educ Res 16(6):671-692