A comprehensive scoping review to identify standards for the development of health information resources on the internet
- PMID: 31220126
- PMCID: PMC6586310
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218342
A comprehensive scoping review to identify standards for the development of health information resources on the internet
Abstract
Background: Online health information, if evidence-based and unbiased, can improve patients' and caregivers' health knowledge and assist them in disease management and health care decision-making.
Objective: To identify standards for the development of health information resources on the internet for patients.
Methods: We searched in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for publications describing evaluation instruments for websites providing health information. Eligible instruments were identified by three independent reviewers and disagreements resolved by consensus. Items reported were extracted and categorized into seven domains (accuracy, completeness and comprehensiveness, technical elements, design and aesthetics, usability, accessibility, and readability) that were previously thought to be a minimum requirement for websites.
Results: One hundred eleven articles met inclusion criteria, reporting 92 evaluation instruments (1609 items). We found 74 unique items that we grouped into the seven domains. For the accuracy domain, one item evaluated information provided in concordance with current guidelines. For completeness and comprehensiveness, 18 items described the disease with respect to various topics such as etiology or therapy, among others. For technical elements, 27 items evaluated disclosure of authorship, sponsorship, affiliation, editorial process, feedback process, privacy, and data protection. For design and aesthetics, 10 items evaluated consistent layout and relevant graphics and images. For usability, 10 items evaluated ease of navigation and functionality of internal search engines. For accessibility, five items evaluated the availability of websites to people with audiovisual disabilities. For readability, three items evaluated conversational writing style and use of a readability tool to determine the reading level of the text.
Conclusion: We identified standards for the development of online patient health information. This proposed instrument can serve as a guideline to develop and improve how health information is presented on the internet.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Similar articles
-
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881. Med J Aust. 2020. PMID: 33314144
-
Development of the AASPIRE Web Accessibility Guidelines for Autistic Web Users.Autism Adulthood. 2019 Jun 1;1(2):146-157. doi: 10.1089/aut.2018.0020. Epub 2019 Apr 13. Autism Adulthood. 2019. PMID: 32292887 Free PMC article.
-
Quality and content evaluation of websites with information about immune checkpoint inhibitors: An environmental scan.PLoS One. 2022 Oct 10;17(10):e0275676. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275676. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 36215234 Free PMC article.
-
The quality, suitability, and readability of web-based resources on endometriosis-associated dyspareunia: A systematic review.Health Informatics J. 2024 Jan-Mar;30(1):14604582241231151. doi: 10.1177/14604582241231151. Health Informatics J. 2024. PMID: 38308637
-
Credibility, Accuracy, and Comprehensiveness of Readily Available Internet-Based Information on Treatment and Management of Peripheral Artery Disease and Intermittent Claudication: Review.J Med Internet Res. 2022 Oct 17;24(10):e39555. doi: 10.2196/39555. J Med Internet Res. 2022. PMID: 36251363 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Information in Spanish on the Internet about the Prevention of COVID-19.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Nov 7;17(21):8228. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17218228. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020. PMID: 33171724 Free PMC article.
-
Readability and Suitability of Information Presented on a University Health Center Website.Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2022 Oct 1;19(4):1f. eCollection 2022 Fall. Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2022. PMID: 36348731 Free PMC article.
-
Defining Recommendations to Guide User Interface Design: Multimethod Approach.JMIR Hum Factors. 2022 Sep 30;9(3):e37894. doi: 10.2196/37894. JMIR Hum Factors. 2022. PMID: 36178714 Free PMC article.
-
Quality of web-based information at the beginning of a global pandemic: a cross-sectional infodemiology study investigating preventive measures and self care methods of the coronavirus disease 2019.BMC Public Health. 2021 Jun 14;21(1):1141. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11141-9. BMC Public Health. 2021. PMID: 34126962 Free PMC article.
-
The Birth of the Contextual Health Education Readability Score in an Examination of Online Influenza Patient Education Materials.Cureus. 2024 Mar 22;16(3):e56715. doi: 10.7759/cureus.56715. eCollection 2024 Mar. Cureus. 2024. PMID: 38650807 Free PMC article.
References
-
- 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(15):1244–5. Epub 1997/04/16. . - PubMed
-
- Fox S, Duggan M. Health online 2013: Pew Research Center 2013 [October 10, 2016]. Available from: http://www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media/Files/Reports/PIP_HealthOnlin....
-
- Hesse BW, Nelson DE, Kreps GL, Croyle RT, Arora NK, Rimer BK, et al. Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the Internet and its implications for health care providers: findings from the first Health Information National Trends Survey. Archives of internal medicine. 2005;165(22):2618–24. Epub 2005/12/14. 10.1001/archinte.165.22.2618 . - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous