Adding Dimensions to the Analysis of the Quality of Health Information of Websites Returned by Google: Cluster Analysis Identifies Patterns of Websites According to their Classification and the Type of Intervention Described

Frontiers in Public Health

Volumn 3, Issue , 2015, Pages

  Yaqub, Mubashar ^a   Ghezzi, Pietro ^a  

^a BRIGHTON AND SUSSEX MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

information; Internet; IQ; migraine; online; websites

Indexed keywords

EID: 84977166339     PISSN: None     EISSN: 22962565     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2015.00204     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. 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) 285:2612–21.10.1001/jama.285.20.261211368735
2. Eysenbach G Kohler C. How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ (2002) 324:573–7.10.1136/bmj.324.7337.57311884321
3. Liang BA Mackey T. Searching for safety: addressing search engine, website, and provider accountability for illicit online drug sales. Am J Law Med (2009) 35(1):125–84.10.1177/009885880903500104
4. Fox S Duggan M. Health Online 2013. PEW Internet and American Life Project. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life Project (2013).
5. Health on the Net Foundation. The HON Code of Conduct for Medical and Health Web Sites (HONcode). Available from: http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Conduct.html
6. Silberg WM Lundberg GD Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the internet: caveant lector et viewor – let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA (1997) 277:1244–5.10.1001/jama.1997.03540390074039
7. 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) 53:105–11.10.1136/jech.53.2.10510396471
8. Brosnan S Barron E Sahm LJ. Health literacy and the clozapine patient. Perspect Public Health (2012) 132:39–42.10.1177/175791391143103822458151
9. Kaphingst KA Zanfini CJ Emmons KM. Accessibility of web sites containing colorectal cancer information to adults with limited literacy (United States). Cancer Causes Control (2006) 17:147–51.10.1007/s10552-005-5116-316425092
10. Thompson AE Graydon SL. Patient-oriented methotrexate information sites on the internet: a review of completeness, accuracy, format, reliability, credibility, and readability. J Rheumatol (2009) 36:41–9.10.3899/jrheum.08043019004031
11. 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) 8:59.10.1186/1741-7015-8-5920939875
12. Wang RY Strong DM. Beyond accuracy: what data quality means to data consumers. J Manag Inf Syst (1996):5–33.
13. Lee YW Strong DM Kahn BK Wang RY. AIMQ: a methodology for information quality assessment. Inf Manag (2002) 40:133–46.10.1016/S0378-7206(02)00043-5
14. Peterlin BL Gambini-Suarez E Lidicker J Levin M. An analysis of cluster headache information provided on internet websites. Headache (2008) 48:378–84.10.1111/j.1526-4610.2007.00951.x18005143
15. Martins EN Morse LS. Evaluation of internet websites about retinopathy of prematurity patient education. Br J Ophthalmol (2005) 89:565–8.10.1136/bjo.2004.05511115834086
16. Dy CJ Taylor SA Patel RM Kitay A Roberts TR Daluiski A. The effect of search term on the quality and accuracy of online information regarding distal radius fractures. J Hand Surg Am (2012) 37:1881–7.10.1016/j.jhsa.2012.05.02122857909
17. Fabricant PD Dy CJ Patel RM Blanco JS Doyle SM. Internet search term affects the quality and accuracy of online information about developmental hip dysplasia. J Pediatr Orthop (2013) 33:361–5.10.1097/BPO.0b013e31827d0dd223653022
18. Freelon DG. ReCal: intercoder reliability calculation as a web service. Int J Internet Sci (2010) 5:20–33.
19. Meric F Bernstam EV Mirza NQ Hunt KK Ames FC Ross MI et al. Breast cancer on the world wide web: cross sectional survey of quality of information and popularity of websites. BMJ (2002) 324:577–81.10.1136/bmj.324.7337.57711884322
20. Barker S Charlton NP Holstege CP. Accuracy of internet recommendations for prehospital care of venomous snake bites. Wilderness Environ Med (2010) 21:298–302.10.1016/j.wem.2010.08.01621168781
21. Zeldman J. Taking Your Talent to the Web: A Guide for the Transitioning Designer. San Francisco, CA: New Riders Publishing (2001).
22. Ghezzi P Chumber S Brabazon T. Educating medical students to evaluate the quality of health information on the web. The Philosophy of Information Quality. Cham: Springer International (2014). p. 183–99.
23. Bernstam EV Walji MF Sagaram S Sagaram D Johnson CW Meric-Bernstam F. Commonly cited website quality criteria are not effective at identifying inaccurate online information about breast cancer. Cancer (2008) 112:1206–13.10.1002/cncr.2330818266210
24. Chumber S Huber J Ghezzi P. A methodology to analyze the quality of health information on the internet: the example of diabetic neuropathy. Diabetes Educ (2014) 41(1):95–105.10.1177/014572171456077225480397
25. Cutrell E Guan Z. What are you looking for? An eye-tracking study of information usage in web search. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY: ACM (2007). p. 407–16.
26. Hanif F Abayasekara K Willcocks L Jolly EC Jamieson NV Praseedom RK et al. The quality of information about kidney transplantation on the World Wide Web. Clin Transplant (2007) 21:371–6.10.1111/j.1399-0012.2006.00652.x17488387
27. Granka LA Joachims T Gay G. Eye-tracking analysis of user behavior in WWW search. Proceedings of the 27th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Sheffield: ACM (2004).