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.
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
