Information quality and dynamics of patients' interactions on tonsillectomy web resources

Internet Interventions

Volumn 4, Issue , 2016, Pages 99-104

  Arsenault, Marianne ^a,b   Blouin, Marie Julie ^a,c   Guitton, Matthieu J ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

^b CENTRE DE RECHERCHE DE L INSTITUT UNIVERSITAIRE EN SANTÉ MENTALE DE QUÉBEC   (Canada)

^c LAVAL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Health literacy; Internet; Online health; PEMAT; Readability; Tonsillectomy

Indexed keywords

EID: 84971255123     PISSN: 22147829     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.invent.2016.05.002     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Alamoudi U., Hong P. Readability and quality assessment of websites related to microtia and aural atresia. Int. J. Pediatr. Otorhinolaryngol. 2015, 79:151-156.
2. American Medical Association Health literacy: report of the council on scientific affairs Ad hoc committee of health literacy for the council on scientific affairs. JAMA 1999, 281:552-557.
3. Anon. How to Write Easy to Read Health Materials 2013, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, (accessed July 6, 2015, at http://www.nlm.nih.gov./medlineplus/etr.html.).
4. Anon. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) and User's Guide: An Instrument to Assess the Understandability and Actionability of Print and Audiovisual Patient Education Materials 2013, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD, (accessed July 6, 2015, at http://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/prevention-chronic-care/improve/self-mgmt/pemat/index.html.).
5. Attard A., Coulson N.S. A thematic analysis of patient communication in Parkinson's disease online support group discussion forums. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28:500-506.
6. Baugh R.F., Archer S.M., Mitchell R.B., et al. Clinical practice guideline: tonsillectomy in children. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2011, 144:S1-30.
7. Bhandari N., Shi Y., Jung K. Seeking health information online: does limited healthcare access matter?. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2014, 21:1113-1117.
8. Blank T.O., Adams-Blodnieks M. The who and the what of usage of two cancer online communities. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2007, 23:1249-1257.
9. Blank T.O., Schmidt S.D., Vangsness S.A., et al. Differences among breast and prostate cancer online support groups. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2010, 26:1400-1404.
10. Bodenheimer T. Transforming practice. NEJM 2008, 359:2088-2089.
11. Brossard D. New media landscapes and the science information consumer. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2013, 110:14096-14101.
12. Chen A.T. Exploring online support spaces: Using cluster analysis to examine breast cancer, diabetes and fibromyalgia support groups. Patient Educ. Couns. 2012, 87:250-257.
13. Cherla D.V., Sanghvi S., Choudhry O.J., et al. Readability assessment of Internet-based patient education materials related to endoscopic sinus surgery. Laryngoscope 2012, 122:1649-1654.
14. Cherla D.V., Sanghvi S., Choudhry O.J., et al. Readability assessment of internet-based patient education materials related to acoustic neuromas. Otol. Neurotol. 2013, 34:1349-1354.
15. Cullen K.A., Hall M.J., Golosinskiy A. Ambulatory Surgery in the United States, 2006. National Health Statistics Reports. No. 11 2009, Revised, National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, Md., (DHHS publication no. (PHS) 2009-1250.).
16. Eloy J.A., Li S., Kasabwala K., et al. Readability assessment of patient education materials on major otolaryngology association websites. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2012, 47:848-854.
17. Fox S., Duggan M. Health online. Pew Internet and American Life Project 2013, Pew Research Center, Washington DC.
18. Friedman D.B., Hoffman-Goetz L. A systematic review of readability and comprehension instruments used for print and web-based cancer information. Health Educ. Behav. 2006, 33:352-373.
19. Gooden R.J., Winefield H.R. Breast and prostate cancer online discussion boards: a thematic analysis of gender differences and similarities. J. Health Psychol. 2007, 12:103-114.
20. Guitton M.J. Swimming with mermaids: communication and social density in the Second Life merfolk community. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 48:226-235.
21. Guitton M.J. Online maritime health information: an overview of the situation. Int. Marit. Health 2015, 66:139-144.
22. Hansberry D.R., Agarwal N., Gonzales S.F., Baker S.R. Are we effectively informing patients? A quantitative analysis of on-line patient education resources from the American Society of Neuroradiology. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2014, 35:1270-1275.
23. Hansberry D.R., Agarwal N., Shah R., et al. Analysis of the readability of patient education materials from surgical subspecialties. Laryngoscope 2014, 124:405-412.
24. Kasabwala K., Agarwal N., Hansberry D.R., et al. Readability assessment of patient education materials from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2012, 47:466-471.
25. Klemm P., Hurst M., Dearholt S.L., Trone S.R. Cyber solace: gender differences on Internet cancer support groups. Comput. Nurs. 1999, 17:65-72.
26. Kutner M., Greenberg E., Jin Y., Paulsen C. The Health Literacy of America's Adults: Results From the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. National Center for Education Statistics 2006, U.S. Department of Education, 2006, Washington DC., (NCES publication no. 2006-483.).
27. Lomanowska A.M., Guitton M.J. Virtually naked: virtual environment reveals sex-dependent nature of skin disclosure. PLoS One 2012, 7.
28. Meade C.D., Smith C.F. Readability formulas: cautions and criteria. Patient Educ. Couns. 1991, 17:153-158.
29. Mo P.K.H., Malik S.H., Coulson N.S. Gender differences in computer-mediated communication: a systematic literature review of online health-related support groups. Patient Educ. Couns. 2009, 75:16-24.
30. Owen J.E., Klapow J.C., Roth D.L., Tucker D.C. Use of the Internet for information and support: disclosure among persons with breast and prostate cancer. J. Behav. Med. 2004, 27:491-505.
31. Shoemaker S.J., Wolf M.S., Brach C. Development of the Patient Education Materials Assessment tool (PEMAT): a new measure of understandability and actionability for print and audiovisual patient information. Patient Educ. Couns. 2014, 96:395-403.
32. Svider P.F., Agarwal N., Choudhry O.J., et al. Readability assessment of online patient education materials from academic otolaryngology - head and neck surgery departments. Am. J. Otolaryngol. 2013, 34:31-35.
33. Wang L.W., Miller M.J., Schmitt M.R., Wen F.K. Assessing readability formula differences with written health information materials: application, results, and recommendations. Res. Soc. Adm. Pharm. 2013, 9:503-516.
34. Zakowski S.G., Harris C., Krueger, et al. Social barriers to emotional expression and their relations to distress in male and female cancer patients. Br. J. Health Psychol. 2003, 8:271-286.
35. Zellmer C., Zimdars P., Parker S., Safdar N. Evaluating the usefulness of patient education materials on surgical site infection: a systematic assessment. Am. J. Infect. Control 2015, 43:167-168.