Assessment of the Quality of Patient-Oriented Internet Information on Fluorescence Imaging in Surgery.

BACKGROUND: In the digital age, patients are increasingly turning to the Internet to seek medical information to aid in their decision-making process before undergoing medical treatments. Fluorescence imaging is an emerging technological tool that holds promise in enhancing intra-operative decision-making during surgical procedures. This study aims to evaluate the quality of patient information available online regarding fluorescence imaging in surgery and assesses whether it adequately supports informed decision-making. METHOD: The term "patient information on fluorescence imaging in surgery" was searched on Google. The websites that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were assessed using 2 scoring instruments. DISCERN was used to evaluate the reliability of consumer health information. QUEST was used to assess authorship, tone, conflict of interest and complementarity. RESULTS: Out of the 50 websites identified from the initial search, 10 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Only two of these websites were updated in the last two years. The definition of fluorescence imaging was stated in only 50% of the websites. Although all websites mentioned the benefits of fluorescence imaging, none mentioned potential risks. Assessment by DISCERN showed that 30% of the websites were rated low and 70% were rated moderate. With QUEST, the websites demonstrated an average score of 62.5%. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the importance of providing patients with accurate and balanced information about medical technologies and procedures they may undergo. Fluorescence imaging in surgery is a promising technology that can potentially improve surgical outcomes. However, patients need to be well-informed about its benefits and limitations in order to make informed decisions about their healthcare.

[Advancing standards for the development of evidence-based health information for consumers: Needs and priorities among members of the Network for Evidence-based Medicine]. / Inhaltliche Weiterentwicklung von Standards zur Erstellung evidenzbasierter Gesundheitsinformationen: Eine Bedarfserhebung und Priorisierung im EbM-Netzwerk.

BACKGROUND: The Good Practice Guidelines for health information, Good Health Information Austria and Guideline Evidence-based Health Information are established resources for developing evidence-based health information in the German-speaking regions. The aim of this project was to capture challenges in applying these standards in practice, identify gaps and development needs and gain insights for their further development. METHODS: In December 2020, members of the working group for patient information and involvement of the Network for Evidence-based Medicine were invited to share their experiences and needs in applying German standards for evidence-based health information through an online survey focussing on open questions (part 1: needs assessment). The feedback was analysed using qualitative content analysis and presented in a workshop at the EbM Congress 2021 with the goal of specifying the feedback from the needs assessment and discussing ideas for the further development of the standards (part 2: specification). In the final step, a second survey was conducted in February 2023 to prioritize the identified topics by the working group members (part 3: prioritization). The results were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Among the 41 participants, only 23% considered the standards to be sufficient, and only 55% found their application in the development of information to be easy or rather easy. The needs assessment and workshop (n=46) helped to identify various areas of action. With regard to the application of the standards, the following challenges were identified: lack of user orientation, content gaps, methods and risk communication. Gaps in the standards were identified regarding formats, content, and the connection to healthcare provision. For the advancement of the standards ideas for additional content, stakeholder involvement, and improvement of the usability of the standards were identified. In the prioritization survey, the topic areas, "presenting benefits and harms" and "content beyond treatments (in particular, diagnostics and prognosis)" were considered to be the most important (n=36). DISCUSSION: Among members of the working group for patient information and involvement of the German Network for Evidence-based Medicine, a high demand has been identified for the further development of standards for creating evidence-based health information. In addition to content development, the integration of existing documents and tools should also be considered, including products issued by other institutions. The success of advancing the standards also depends on improving their applicability - for example through an attractive online platform. The results are limited by the sample which only included members of the EbM Network's patient information and participation working group and a limited response rate. CONCLUSIONS: The needs assessment showed that the currently established standards and recommendations for the development of evidence-based health information in the German-speaking regions represent important cornerstones but need to be expanded to answer more practice-oriented questions. The challenges and proposed solutions stated by the participants can help further develop the standards. The prioritization can be used to set priorities for the development of the standards, guide the order of possible work packages and allocate resources.

Assessment of medical information on irritable bowel syndrome information in Wikipedia and Baidu Encyclopedia: comparative study.

Background: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a functional gastrointestinal disorder (FGID) with heterogeneous clinical presentations. There are no clear testing parameters for its diagnosis, and the complex pathophysiology of IBS and the limited time that doctors have to spend with patients makes it difficult to adequately educate patients in the outpatient setting. An increased awareness of IBS means that patients are more likely to self-diagnose and self-manage IBS based on their own symptoms. These factors may make patients more likely to turn to Internet resources. Wikipedia is the most popular online encyclopedia among English-speaking users, with numerous validations. However, in Mandarin-speaking regions, the Baidu Encyclopedia is most commonly used. There have been no studies on the reliability, readability, and objectivity of IBS information on the two sites. This is an urgent issue as these platforms are accessed by approximately 1.45 billion people. Objective: We compared the IBS content on Wikipedia (in English) and Baidu Baike (in Chinese), two online encyclopedias, in terms of reliability, readability, and objectivity. Methods: The Baidu Encyclopedia (in Chinese) and Wikipedia (in English) were evaluated based on the Rome IV IBS definitions and diagnoses. All possible synonyms and derivatives for IBS and IBS-related FGIDs were screened and identified. Two gastroenterology experts evaluated the scores of articles for both sites using the DISCERN instrument, the Journal of the American Medical Association scoring system (JAMA), and the Global Quality Score (GQS). Results: Wikipedia scored higher overall with DISCERN (p < .0001), JAMA (p < .0001) and GQS (p < .05) than the Baidu Encyclopedia. Specifically, Wikipedia scored higher in DISCERN Section 1 (p < .0001), DISCERN Section 2 (p < .01), DISCERN Section 3 (p < .001), and the General DISCERN score (p < .0001) than the Baidu Encyclopedia. Both sites had low DISCERN Section 2 scores (p = .18). Wikipedia also had a larger percentage of high quality scores in total DISCERN, DISCERN Section 1, and DISCERN Section 3 (p < .0001, P < .0001, P < .0004, respectively, based on the above 3 (60%) rule). Conclusions: Wikipedia provides more reliable, higher quality, and more objective IBS-related health information than the Baidu Encyclopedia. However, there should be improvements in the information quality for both sites. Medical professionals and institutions should collaborate with these online platforms to offer better health information for IBS.

Assessment of the Arabic patient-centered online information about orthodontic pain: A quality and readability assessment.

BACKGROUND: This study assesses the quality and readability of Arabic online information about orthodontic pain. With the increasing reliance on the internet for health information, especially among Arabic speakers, it's critical to ensure the accuracy and comprehensiveness of available content. Our methodology involved a systematic search using the Arabic term for (Orthodontic Pain) in Google, Bing, and Yahoo. This search yielded 193,856 results, from which 74 websites were selected based on predefined criteria, excluding duplicates, scientific papers, and non-Arabic content. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For quality assessment, we used the DISCERN instrument, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, and the Health on the Net (HON) code. Readability was evaluated using the Simplified Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) scores. RESULTS: Results indicated that none of the websites received the HONcode seal. The DISCERN assessment showed median total scores of 14.96 (± 5.65), with low overall quality ratings. In JAMA benchmarks, currency was the most achieved aspect, observed in 45 websites (60.81%), but none met all four criteria simultaneously. Readability scores suggested that the content was generally understandable, with a median FKGL score of 6.98 and a median SMOG score of 3.98, indicating middle school-level readability. CONCLUSION: This study reveals a significant gap in the quality of Arabic online resources on orthodontic pain, highlighting the need for improved standards and reliability. Most websites failed to meet established quality criteria, underscoring the necessity for more accurate and trustworthy health information for Arabic-speaking patients.

Assessment of the quality of online patient information resources for patients considering parastomal hernia treatment.

AIM: The aim was to examine the quality of online patient information resources for patients considering parastomal hernia treatment. METHODS: A Google search was conducted using lay search terms for patient facing sources on parastomal hernia. The quality of the content was assessed using the validated DISCERN instrument. Readability of written content was established using the Flesch-Kincaid score. Sources were also assessed against the essential content and process standards from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) framework for shared decision making support tools. Content analysis was also undertaken to explore what the sources covered and to identify any commonalities across the content. RESULTS: Fourteen sources were identified and assessed using the identified tools. The mean Flesch-Kincaid reading ease score was 43.61, suggesting that the information was difficult to read. The overall quality of the identified sources was low based on the pooled analysis of the DISCERN and Flesch-Kincaid scores, and when assessed against the criteria in the NICE standards framework for shared decision making tools. Content analysis identified eight categories encompassing 59 codes, which highlighted considerable variation between sources. CONCLUSIONS: The current information available to patients considering parastomal hernia treatment is of low quality and often does not contain enough information on treatment options for patients to be able to make an informed decision about the best treatment for them. There is a need for high-quality information, ideally co-produced with patients, to provide patients with the necessary information to allow them to make informed decisions about their treatment options when faced with a symptomatic parastomal hernia.

Cosmetic Contact Lenses in the United Kingdom: Assessment of Online Regulation and Quality of Consumer Health Information.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the compliance of online vendors to the UK Opticians Act 1989 Section 27 requirements and safety regulations for cosmetic contact lens (CCL) sales and the quality of online CCL health information. METHODS: The top 50 websites selling CCLs on each three search engines, namely Google, Yahoo, and Bing, were selected. Duplicates were removed, and the remaining websites were systematically analyzed in February 2023. UK legal authorization for CCL sales was assessed using the Opticians Act Section 27 and safety regulations determined by the presence of Conformité Européene (CE) marking. The quality and reliability of online information was graded using the DISCERN (16-80) and JAMA (0-4) scores by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Forty-seven eligible websites were analyzed. Only six (12.7%) met the UK legal authorization for CCL sales. Forty-nine different brands of CCLs were sold on these websites, of which 13 (26.5%) had no CE marking. The mean DISCERN and JAMA benchmark scores were 26 ± 12.2 and 1.3 ± 0.6, respectively (intraclass correlation scores: 0.99 for both). CONCLUSIONS: A significant number of websites provide consumers with easy, unsafe, and unregulated access to CCLs. Most online stores do not meet the requirements set out in the Opticians Act for CCL sales in the United Kingdom. A significant number of CCLs lack CE marking, while the average quality of information on websites selling CCLs is poor. Together, these pose a risk to consumers purchasing CCLs from unregulated websites, and therefore, further stringent regulations on the online sales of these products are needed.

A Systematic Quality Assessment of Online Resources on Eyelid Ptosis Using the Modified Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (mEQIP) Tool.

BACKGROUND: Eyelid ptosis is an underestimated pathology deeply affecting patients' quality of life. Internet has increasingly become the major source of information regarding health care, and patients often browse on websites to acquire an initial knowledge on the subject. However, there is lack of data concerning the quality of available information focusing on the eyelid ptosis and its treatment. We systematically evaluated online information quality on eyelid ptosis by using the "Ensuring Quality Information for Patients" (EQIP) scale. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Google, Yahoo and Bing have been searched for the keywords "Eyelid ptosis," "Eyelid ptosis surgery" and "Blepharoptosis." The first 50 hits were included, evaluating the quality of information with the expanded EQIP tool. Websites in English and intended for general non-medical public use were included. Irrelevant documents, videos, pictures, blogs and articles with no access were excluded. RESULTS: Out of 138 eligible websites, 79 (57,7%) addressed more than 20 EQIP items, with an overall median score of 20,2. Only 2% discussed procedure complication rates. The majority fail to disclose severe complications and quantifying risks, fewer than 18% clarified the potential need for additional treatments. Surgical procedure details were lacking, and there was insufficient information about pre-/postoperative precautions for patients. Currently, online quality information has not improved since COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the urgent requirement for improved patient-oriented websites adhering to international standards for plastic and oculoplastic surgery. Healthcare providers should effectively guide their patients in finding trustworthy and reliable eyelid ptosis correction information. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

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.

Quality of complementary and alternative medicine information for type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional survey and quality assessment of websites.

BACKGROUND: The global prevalence of diabetes mellitus is projected to reach approximately 700 million by the year 2045, with roughly 90-95% of all diabetes cases being type 2 in nature. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) frequently seek information about complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) online. This study assessed the quality of publicly accessible websites providing consumer health information at the intersection of T2DM and CAM. METHODS: An online search engine (Google) was searched to identify pertinent websites containing information specific to CAM for T2DM patients, and the relevant websites were then screened with an eligibility criteria. Consumer health information found on eligible websites were then assessed for quality using the DISCERN instrument, a 16-item standardized scoring system. RESULTS: Across the 480 webpages identified, 94 unique webpages remained following deduplication, and 37 eligible webpages belonged to and were collapsed into 30 unique websites that were each assessed using the DISCERN instrument. The mean overall quality score (question 16) across all 30 assessed websites was 3.55 (SD = 0.86), and the mean summed DISCERN score was 52.40 (SD = 12.11). Eighty percent of websites presented a wide range of CAM treatment options with the associated benefits/risks of each treatment, but in 56.7% of the websites, the sources used to collect information were unreliable. CONCLUSION: This study identified, assessed, and presents findings on the quality of online CAM information for T2DM. Although there were several high scoring websites, there was variability across most of the individual DISCERN items in the assessed websites. This study highlights the importance of awareness among healthcare providers regarding the reliability of online information about CAM treatment and management options for T2DM. Healthcare providers should be aware of patients' information seeking behaviour, guide them in navigating through the content they encounter online, and provide them with resources containing trustworthy and reliable information.

Hesitancy Toward a COVID-19 Vaccine.

The scientific community has come together in a mass mobilization to combat the public health risks of COVID-19, including efforts to develop a vaccine. However, the success of any vaccine depends on the share of the population that gets vaccinated. We designed a survey experiment in which a nationally representative sample of 3,133 adults in the USA stated their intentions to vaccinate themselves and their children for COVID-19. The factors that we varied across treatments were: the stated severity and infectiousness of COVID-19 and the stated source of the risk information (White House or the Centers for Disease Control). We find that 20% of people in the USA intend to decline the vaccine. We find no statistically significant effect on vaccine intentions from the severity of COVID-19. In contrast, we find that the degree of infectiousness of the coronavirus influences vaccine intentions and that inconsistent risk messages from public health experts and elected officials may reduce vaccine uptake. However, the most important determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy seem to be distrust of the vaccine safety (including uncertainty due to vaccine novelty), as well as general vaccine avoidance, as implied by not having had a flu shot in the last two years.

Comprehensively addressing postpartum maternal health: a content and image review of commercially available mobile health apps.

BACKGROUND: The United States is currently facing a maternal morbidity and mortality crisis, with the highest rates of any resource-rich nation. In efforts to address this, new guidelines for postpartum care suggest that mobile health (mHealth) apps can help provide complementary clinical support for new mothers during the postpartum period. However, to date no study has evaluated the quality of existing mHealth tools targeted to this time period in terms of sufficiency of maternal health information, inclusivity of people of color, and app usability. METHODS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standards were used to review the peripartum apps from the Apple and Google Play stores in either the Health/Fitness, Medical, or Education categories. Apps were evaluated for extent and quality of maternal health information and inclusivity of people of color using an a priori coding scheme. App usability was evaluated using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) score. RESULTS: Of the 301 apps from the Apple and Google Play stores, 25 met criteria for final evaluation. Of the 30 maternal health topics coded for, the median number addressed by apps was 19.5 (65%). Peripartum behaviors were more frequently addressed than peripartum outpatient care topics and peripartum acute health risks. The coverage of maternal health information and inclusivity of people of color in app imagery both correlated positively with the MARS usability score of the app. Only 8 apps (32%) portrayed greater than 24% images of people of color- the percent of non-white Americans according to 2019 census estimates. There was no correlation between MARS usability score and number of app users, as estimated by number of ratings for the app available on the app store. In addition, apps with evidence-based maternal health information had greater MARS engagement, information, and aesthetics scores. However, presence of evidence-based information did not correlate with greater numbers of app users. CONCLUSIONS: Current commercially available peripartum apps range widely in quality. Overall current app offerings generally do not provide adequate maternal health information and are not optimally accessible to the target users in terms of inclusivity of women of color or app usability. Apps delivering evidence-based information and more usable design are more likely to meet these standards but are not more likely to be downloaded by users.

Improving meningococcal MenACWY and 4CMenB/meningococcal group B vaccine-related health literacy in patients: Importance of readability of pharmaceutical Patient Leaflets.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Patient information leaflets (PILs) or Patient Leaflets (PLs) formally accompany dispensed medicines and are intended to provide the patient with information on how to use the medicine safely. To date, there have been no studies that have examined the readability of meningococcal vaccine patient-facing information, including information contained within the vaccine PIL. Given the role of pharmacists in presenting PILs to patients, it was, therefore, the aim of this study to quantitatively analyse the readability of Patient Leaflets, which accompany licensed meningococcal vaccines in the UK and US and to compare PILs to vaccine pharmaceutical manufacturers' summary of product characteristics (SPC), as well as other patient-facing vaccine-related information. METHODS: Five sources of meningococcal vaccine information were examined for the licensed meningococcal vaccines in the UK (Bexsero, Menveo, Menitorix, Trumenba, Nimenrix & NeisVac-C) and in the United States (Bexsero, Menveo, Trumenba, Menactra, Menomune-A/C/Y/W-135, Menquadfi), including as follows: (i) SPC (Electronic Medicines Compendium, UK), (ii) Package Insert (FDA; USA), (iii) Patient Leaflet (Electronic Medicines Compendium, UK), (iv) Vaccine pharmaceutical websites and (v) government web resources. Readability was examined employing 10 readability metrics, including the Flesch Reading Ease and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade level. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The information source with the greatest readability scores was the UK Patient Leaflet, which had a mean Flesch Reading Ease score of 58.1 and a mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade score of 7.3, followed by the US Department of Health & Human Services patient-facing website for vaccines (55.9 & 8, respectively), followed by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Vaccine Information Statement (47.3 & 9.4, respectively). Pharmaceutical patient-facing websites for meningococcal vaccines had mean scores of 44.6 and 9.9, respectively. When compared with UK Patient Leaflets, pharmaceutical websites were statistically different with poorer readability with both Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level indices (p = 0.02 & p = 0.04, respectively). WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Pharmaceutical meningococcal vaccine PILs were easily read and had statistically significant good readability scores in comparison with vaccine SPCs and US Package Inserts, pharmaceutical product websites and other government patient-facing meningococcal vaccine information. Preparation of patient-facing materials of a complex topic, such as describing meningococcal vaccines, is difficult to accomplish. Although there is a plurality of sources of information through websites and social media, PILs are one of the few sources that are provided directly to patients. This underpins the potential importance of PILs and the importance of their readability. Adoption of readability calculators and scrutiny of materials for their readability will help authors develop materials with improved understanding for vaccine recipients, potentially leading to improved health literacy and vaccine uptake. Renewed efforts should be sought to promote the information within the PIL, thereby maximizing the value of this resource with vaccine recipients, their carers and family.

An Assessment of Available Information on the World Wide Web for Patients with Lower Limb Arterial Disease.

OBJECTIVE: The quality of patient information relating to intermittent claudication (IC) and peripheral arterial disease (PAD) on the World Wide Web was assessed. METHODS: The quality of websites and YouTube videos was assessed using the search terms "intermittent claudication" and "peripheral arterial disease". The first 50 hits screened for each search term from the three largest search engines by market share, and the first 20 videos from YouTube were screened. Website quality was scored using the University of Michigan Consumer Health Website tool (maximum score 80). Readability was calculated using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score (maximum score 100). Videos were classified by content and upload source. Video reliability was assessed using the JAMA benchmark criteria. Video educational content was assessed using the Global Quality Score (GQS). Subjective content assessment was undertaken. RESULTS: Seventy-six websites were analysed. The majority of websites for both IC (51.7%) and PAD (72.3%) were rated as weak. The median Michigan score for IC (27; interquartile range [IQR] 15, 32.5) was lower that the score for PAD (31; IQR 25.5, 38.8; p = .030). The majority of websites for both IC (69%) and PAD (68.1%) were rated as requiring an above average reading level. The overall median FRE score was 55.9 (IQR 46.6, 60.6) for IC and 55.3 (IQR 44.6, 59.3) for PAD. Twenty-two videos were analysed. Of the 14 videos evaluated as part of the PAD search, the median JAMA score was 2 (2 - 3), the median GQS score was 3 (3 - 3) and the evaluation of content score was 8.5 (7.25 - 11.5). The equivalent scores for the IC search were 2 (2 - 2), 3 (3 - 4), and 5.5 (5 - 8). CONCLUSION: The educational quality and reliability of information both in written and video form on the internet is low. Attention needs to focus on improving the quality of all forms of information delivery to allow proper advocacy for patients.

Quality and Readability Assessment of Websites on Human Papillomavirus and Oropharyngeal Cancer.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The incidence of human papillomavirus-positive (HPV+) oropharyngeal cancer is rising, but public knowledge about this diagnosis remains low. This study aimed to investigate the quality and readability of online information about HPV+ oropharyngeal cancer. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional website analysis. METHODS: This study conducted a total of 12 web searches across Google, Yahoo, and Bing to identify websites related to HPV+ oropharyngeal cancer. The QUality Evaluation Scoring Tool (QUEST) was used to measure quality based on seven website criteria. The Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) were used to measure readability, with scores estimating the education level a reader would require to understand a piece of text. Readability improves as FRES increases and FKGL decreases. RESULTS: Twenty-seven unique web pages were evaluated. The mean USA reading grade level as measured by FKGL was 10.42 (standard deviation = 1.54). There was an inverse relationship between quality and readability, with a significant positive correlation between QUEST score and FKGL (r = 0.343, P = .040) and a significant negative correlation between QUEST score and FRES (r = -0.537, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: With a mean USA reading grade level more than four grades above the American Medical Association's recommendation and results indicating that readability suffers as quality improves, these findings suggest that the currently available online information about HPV+ oropharyngeal cancer is insufficient. Improved patient education practices and resources about this diagnosis are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 131:87-94, 2021.

Assessment of the Readability of Online Patient Education Material from Major Geriatric Associations.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: An increasing number of patients are using the internet to supplement information provided by medical professionals. Online geriatric patient education materials (PEMs) should be written at or below a 6th grade reading level (GRL) that takes into account barriers unique to the geriatric population. The objectives of the study are to assess PEMs of geriatric associations' websites and determine whether they are above the GRL recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and National Institutes of Health. DESIGN: Descriptive and correlational methodology. PEMs from 10 major geriatric associations were assessed for their GRL using 10 scales. Eight of the scales provide a numerical GRL while two of the scales provide a visual representation of the GRLs. Analysis was conducted using Readability Studio 2019.3. SETTING: Analysis was conducted February 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Identified 10 geriatric associations and 884 PEMs. MEASUREMENTS: GRLs were measured by 10 validated readability indices: the Degrees of Reading Power and Grade Equivalent test, Flesch-Kincaid grade level, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook test, Coleman-Liau Index, Gunning Fog Index, New Fog Count, New Dale-Chall readability formula, Ford, Caylor, Sticht scale, Raygor readability estimate graph, and Fry readability graph. RESULTS: The mean of all PEMs using the numerical scales was 11.1 ± 2.4. Ninety-nine percent of PEMs are above the 6th GRL. PEMs ranged from a grade 3.0 to 19.0 reading level. Analysis of variance demonstrated a significant difference between associations (P < .0001), and multiple comparison analysis identified the National Institute on Aging as the content easiest to read (9.5 ± 1.6). CONCLUSION: PEMs from geriatric association websites are written above the recommended 6th GRL. As patients increasingly look toward online supplementary health information during COVID-19, there is an opportunity for improving PEMs to enable greater comprehension by the target population.

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.

Assessment of quality and readability of internet-based health information related to commonly prescribed angiotensin receptor blockers.

INTRODUCTION: Hypertension is a global public health burden. Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have proven efficacy in the management of hypertension and related complications. The Internet has become a major source of health information for patients and healthcare professionals. The study aimed to assess the quality and readability of internet-based information related to selected Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ARBs). METHODS: The three most widely used ARBs were identified from published literature, after which internet-based patient information was identified from the first five pages of three search engines (Google, Yahoo and Bing). Quality of identified websites were assessed using the DISCERN instrument, while readability was evaluated using the SMOG instrument and the Flesch-Kincaid readability algorithm. Final ratings were then calculated as described by the instruments developers. Further, inter-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences. RESULTS: The average overall DISCERN score in this study was 2.99 (SD±1.05). No website received an excellent rating, 15% were rated good, 66% as moderate and 19% as poor. The inter-class reliability was 0.804 for losartan and 0.695 for valsartan. The mean Flesch Reading Ease score for the websites was 48.87 (SD±16.12), mean Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level was 9.29 (SD±1.98) while mean SMOG value was 11.29 (SD±1.70). CONCLUSION: Overall, patient information on the reviewed ARBs websites was found to be of moderate quality and suboptimal readability. Content providers on websites should ensure that health information is of favorable quality and easy to read by patients with varying degree of health literacy.

Does YouTube Provide Reliable and High-Quality Information? Assessment of Pap Smear Test Videos.

AIM: YouTube is one of the most popular video-sharing platforms and is used by many people as a source of information regarding health conditions. Although there are many studies examining YouTube health-related videos in terms of quality, content and accuracy, there is not any study observing the content of YouTube videos about the "Pap smear test." Therefore, we intended to evaluate YouTube videos related to the Pap smear test. METHODS: We made a search by typing "Pap smear test" and observed the first 100 videos. According to our selection criteria, only 42 videos were reviewed. We used 3 different questionnaires to rate the videos. The videos were independently rated by 2 gynecologists in terms of technical aspects, follow-up protocol, and video quality. RESULTS: Our study showed that clarity of the technical aspects of Pap smear testing (Q1) was 40% and that of the follow-up protocol (Q2) was only 11%. In terms of video quality (Q3), the adequacy rate was 34%. There was a statistically significant negative correlation between search rank and the video power index (which increased as the ranking decreased to rank 1, r: -0.481). CONCLUSION: We did not find quality and reliable information on YouTube videos about the Pap smear test, which is important for early detection of cervical cancers. While preparing health-related videos for YouTube and similar websites, the support of professional healthcare workers will help provide more accurate content.