Quality Assessment of Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Patient Information on the Internet Using the Modified Ensuring Quality Information for Patients Tool.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the quality of patient information material regarding elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair on the internet using the Modified Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (MEQIP) tool. METHODS: A qualitative assessment of internet based patient information was performed. The 12 most used search terms relating to AAA repair were identified using Google Trends, with the first 10 pages of websites retrieved for each term searched. Duplicates were removed, and information for patients undergoing elective AAA were selected. Further exclusion criteria were marketing material, academic journals, videos, and non-English language sites. The remaining websites were then MEQIP scored independently by two reviewers, producing a final score by consensus. RESULTS: A total of 1 297 websites were identified, with 235 (18.1%) eligible for analysis. The median MEQIP score was 18 (interquartile range [IQR] 14, 21) out of a possible 36. The highest score was 33. The 99th percentile MEQIP scoring websites scored > 27, with four of these six sites representing online copies of hospital patient information leaflets, however hospital sites overall had lower median MEQIP scores than most other institution types. MEQIP subdomain median scores were: content, 8 (IQR 6, 11); identification, 3 (IQR 1, 3); and structure, 7 (IQR 6, 9). Of the analysed websites, 77.9% originated from the USA (median score 17) and 12.8% originated in the UK (median score 22). Search engine ranking was related to website institution type but had no correlation with MEQIP. CONCLUSION: When assessed by the MEQIP tool, most websites regarding elective AAA repair are of questionable quality. This is in keeping with studies in other surgical and medical fields. Search engine ranking is not a reliable measure of quality of patient information material regarding elective AAA repair. Health practitioners should be aware of this issue as well as the whereabouts of high quality material to which patients can be directed.

COVID-19 prevention and treatment information on the internet: a systematic analysis and quality assessment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the quality of information regarding the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 available to the general public from all countries. DESIGN: Systematic analysis using the 'Ensuring Quality Information for Patients' (EQIP) Tool (score 0-36), Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark (score 0-4) and the DISCERN Tool (score 16-80) to analyse websites containing information targeted at the general public. DATA SOURCES: Twelve popular search terms, including 'Coronavirus', 'COVID-19 19', 'Wuhan virus', 'How to treat coronavirus' and 'COVID-19 19 Prevention' were identified by 'Google AdWords' and 'Google Trends'. Unique links from the first 10 pages for each search term were identified and evaluated on its quality of information. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: All websites written in the English language, and provides information on prevention or treatment of COVID-19 intended for the general public were considered eligible. Any websites intended for professionals, or specific isolated populations, such as students from one particular school, were excluded, as well as websites with only video content, marketing content, daily caseload update or news dashboard pages with no health information. RESULTS: Of the 1275 identified websites, 321 (25%) were eligible for analysis. The overall EQIP, JAMA and DISCERN scores were 17.8, 2.7 and 38.0, respectively. Websites originated from 34 countries, with the majority from the USA (55%). News Services (50%) and Government/Health Departments (27%) were the most common sources of information and their information quality varied significantly. Majority of websites discuss prevention alone despite popular search trends of COVID-19 treatment. Websites discussing both prevention and treatment (n=73, 23%) score significantly higher across all tools (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: This comprehensive assessment of online COVID-19 information using EQIP, JAMA and DISCERN Tools indicate that most websites were inadequate. This necessitates improvements in online resources to facilitate public health measures during the pandemic.