Quality of vascular surgery Web sites on the Internet

作者: Perbinder Grewal , Bryn Williams , Swethan Alagaratnam , James Neffendorf , Ritish Soobrah

DOI: 10.1016/J.JVS.2012.04.058

关键词:

摘要: Introduction This study evaluated the readability, accessibility, usability, and reliability of vascular surgery information on Internet in English language. Methods The Google, Yahoo, MSN/Bing search engines were searched for "carotid endarterectomy," "EVAR or endovascular aneurysm repair," "varicose veins varicose surgery." first 50 Web sites from each engine topic analyzed. Flesch Reading Ease Score Gunning Fog Index calculated to assess readability. LIDA tool (Minervation Ltd, Oxford, UK) was used reliability. Results difficult read comprehend. mean scores 53.53 carotid endarterectomy, 50.53 repair, 58.59 veins. 12.3 12.12 10.69 values accessibility good, but results usability poor. Conclusions surgical conditions procedures is poorly written unreliable. We suggest that health professionals should recommend are easy contain high-quality information. Medical must be readable, accessible, usable, reliable.

参考文章(16)
Iain Chalmers, Invalid health information is potentially lethal. BMJ. ,vol. 322, pp. 998- 998 ,(2001) , 10.1136/BMJ.322.7292.998/B
Nora L Keenan, Pooja Bansil, Jeanne C Gilliland, Amy I Zlot, Health-related Information on the Web: Results From the HealthStyles Survey, 2002-2003 Preventing Chronic Disease. ,vol. 3, ,(2006)
Gunther Eysenbach, Christian Köhler, What is the prevalence of health-related searches on the World Wide Web? Qualitative and quantitative analysis of search engine queries on the internet. american medical informatics association annual symposium. ,vol. 2003, pp. 225- 229 ,(2003)
J. P. Kincaid, Jr. Fishburne, Rogers Robert P., Chissom Richard L., Brad S., Derivation of New Readability Formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count and Flesch Reading Ease Formula) for Navy Enlisted Personnel National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151 (AD-A006 655/5GA, MF $2.25, PC $3.75). ,(1975) , 10.21236/ADA006655
Scott Gottlieb, Health information on internet is often unreliable BMJ. ,vol. 321, pp. 136- ,(2000) , 10.1136/BMJ.321.7254.136/B
R. Soobrah, S. K. Clark, Your patient information website: how good is it? Colorectal Disease. ,vol. 14, ,(2012) , 10.1111/J.1463-1318.2011.02792.X
Rudolph Flesch, A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology. ,vol. 32, pp. 221- 233 ,(1948) , 10.1037/H0057532
G Schembri, P Schober, The Internet as a diagnostic aid: the patients' perspective International Journal of Std & Aids. ,vol. 20, pp. 231- 233 ,(2009) , 10.1258/IJSA.2008.008339
Tracey L. Bessell, Steve McDonald, Chris A. Silagy, Jeremy N. Anderson, Janet E. Hiller, Lloyd N. Sansom, Do Internet interventions for consumers cause more harm than good? A systematic review Health Expectations. ,vol. 5, pp. 28- 37 ,(2002) , 10.1046/J.1369-6513.2002.00156.X
Gunther Eysenbach, John Powell, Oliver Kuss, Eun-Ryoung Sa, Empirical Studies Assessing the Quality of Health Information for Consumers on the World Wide Web: A Systematic Review JAMA. ,vol. 287, pp. 2691- 2700 ,(2002) , 10.1001/JAMA.287.20.2691