Online health information on obesity in pregnancy: a systematic review

European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

Volumn 206, Issue , 2016, Pages 147-152

  Al Wattar, Bassel H ^a   Pidgeon, Connie ^b   Learner, Hazel ^b   Zamora, Javier ^a,c   Thangaratinam, Shakila ^a  

^a QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b BARTS HEALTH NHS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^c HOSPITAL RAMÓN Y CAJAL   (Spain)

Author keywords

Internet; Obesity; Online; Patient; Pregnancy; Review

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FUNDING; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MATERNAL OBESITY; MEDICAL INFORMATION; ONLINE SYSTEM; PREGNANCY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK MANAGEMENT; SCORING SYSTEM; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; WEB BROWSER; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; FEMALE; INTERNET; OBESITY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATION; STANDARDS;

CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; OBESITY; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATIONS;

EID: 84989172846     PISSN: 03012115     EISSN: 18727654     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.09.016     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. [1] Malik, V.S., Willett, W.C., Hu, F.B., Global obesity: trends, risk factors and policy implications. Nat Rev Endocrinol 9:1 (2013), 13–27.
2. [2] Yu, C.K.H., Teoh, T.G., Robinson, S., Review article: obesity in pregnancy. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol 113:10 (2006), 1117–1125.
3. [3] Ng, M., Fleming, T., Robinson, M., et al. Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet 384:9945 (2014), 766–781.
4. [4] Thangaratinam, S., Rogozinska, E., Jolly, K., et al. Effects of interventions in pregnancy on maternal weight and obstetric outcomes: meta-analysis of randomised evidence. BMJ, 344(4), 2012, e2088.
5. [5] Poston, L., Bell, R., Croker, H., et al. Effect of a behavioural intervention in obese pregnant women (the UPBEAT study): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 3:10 (2015), 767–777.
6. [6] SC. D. Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer, 2014: The Health of the 51%: Women. Department of Health London [Internet]. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/484383/cmo-report-2014.pdf; 2015.
7. [7] Morahan-Martin, J.M., How internet users find, evaluate, and use online health information: a cross-cultural review. CyberPsychol Behav 7:5 (2004), 497–510.
8. [8] Sillence, E., Briggs, P., Harris, P.R., Fishwick, L., How do patients evaluate and make use of online health information?. Soc Sci Med 64:9 (2007), 1853–1862.
9. [9] Liberati, A., Altman, D.G., Tetzlaff, J., et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med Am Coll Physicians 151:4 (2009), W65–94.
10. [10] Tirlapur, S.A., Leiu, C., Khan, K.S., Quality of information on the internet related to bladder pain syndrome: a systematic review of the evidence. Int Urogynecol J 24:8 (2013), 1257–1262.
11. [11] Modder, J., Fitzsimons, K.J., CMACE/RCOG Joint Guideline: management of women with obesity in pregnancy. 2010, Centre for Maternal and Child Enquiries and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.
12. [12] The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Weight management before, during and after pregnancy. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ph27; 2010.
13. [13] Flesch, R., A new readability yardstick. J Appl Psychol, 32(3), 1948, 221.
14. [14] 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 53:2 (1999), 105–111.
15. [15] Landis, J.R., Koch, G.G., The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 1977, 159–174.
16. [16] Cline, R.J.W., Haynes, K.M., Consumer health information seeking on the Internet: the state of the art. Health Educ Res 16:6 (2001), 671–692.
17. [17] Wong J. wix-vs-weebly-vs-squarespace-vs-jimdo [Internet]. Available from: http://www.websitebuilderexpert.com/wix-vs-weebly-vs-squarespace-vs-jimdo; 2015.
18. [18] Bennett, G.G., Glasgow, R.E., The delivery of public health interventions via the Internet: actualizing their potential. Annu Rev Public Health 30 (2009), 273–292.
19. [19] Luke, B., Hediger, M.L., Scholl, T.O., Point of diminishing returns: when does gestational weight gain cease benefiting birthweight and begin adding to maternal obesity?. J Matern Neonatal Med 5:4 (1996), 168–173.
20. [20] Sajadi, K.P., Goldman, H.B., Social networks lack useful content for incontinence. Urology 78:4 (2011), 764–767.
21. [21] Winker, M.A., Flanagin, A., Chi-Lum, B., et al. Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet: principles governing AMA web sites. JAMA 283:12 (2000), 1600–1606.
22. [22] Benigeri, M., Pluye, P., Shortcomings of health information on the Internet. Health Promot Int 18:4 (2003), 381–386.