Using artificial intelligence to generate medical literature for urology patients: a comparison of three different large language models.

PURPOSE: Large language models (LLMs) are a form of artificial intelligence (AI) that uses deep learning techniques to understand, summarize and generate content. The potential benefits of LLMs in healthcare is predicted to be immense. The objective of this study was to examine the quality of patient information leaflets (PILs) produced by 3 LLMs on urological topics. METHODS: Prompts were created to generate PILs from 3 LLMs: ChatGPT-4, PaLM 2 (Google Bard) and Llama 2 (Meta) across four urology topics (circumcision, nephrectomy, overactive bladder syndrome, and transurethral resection of the prostate). PILs were evaluated using a quality assessment checklist. PIL readability was assessed by the Average Reading Level Consensus Calculator. RESULTS: PILs generated by PaLM 2 had the highest overall average quality score (3.58), followed by Llama 2 (3.34) and ChatGPT-4 (3.08). PaLM 2 generated PILs were of the highest quality in all topics except TURP and was the only LLM to include images. Medical inaccuracies were present in all generated content including instances of significant error. Readability analysis identified PaLM 2 generated PILs as the simplest (age 14-15 average reading level). Llama 2 PILs were the most difficult (age 16-17 average). CONCLUSION: While LLMs can generate PILs that may help reduce healthcare professional workload, generated content requires clinician input for accuracy and inclusion of health literacy aids, such as images. LLM-generated PILs were above the average reading level for adults, necessitating improvement in LLM algorithms and/or prompt design. How satisfied patients are to LLM-generated PILs remains to be evaluated.

Development of an Education Material Targeting Patients Undergoing Lower Extremity Amputation due to Severe Limb Ischemia-A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is associated with a high risk of amputation, yet patients undergoing amputation due to CLTI have little knowledge of the amputation process and the rehabilitation that awaits. The aim of the present study was to develop and validate information material for patients undergoing amputation. METHODS: Nine participants were included in the study. Two focus group interviews were performed with seven patients who had undergone lower extremity amputation due to CLTI within the past 2 y. Additionally, two individual interviews were carried out. A semistructured interview guide was used, and the interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using qualitative content analysis with a deductive approach. RESULTS: Three themes were identified as essential for the design of the written information: Perspectives on design and formatting, Providing information to enhance participation in care, and Accessibility to information and support. The prototyped information leaflet was perceived as acceptable, useable, relevant, and comprehensible by the participants. CONCLUSIONS: For patients to actively engage in their care, it is vital that their information needs are met and that they are provided with psychosocial support when needed. Written and oral information should be provided by a trusted healthcare professional.

Readability of American Society of Metabolic Surgery's Patient Information Publications.

INTRODUCTION: Appropriate education and information are the keystones of patient autonomy. Surgical societies support this goal through online informational publications. Despite these recommendations, many of these sources do not provide the appropriate level of reading for the average patient. Multiple national organizations, including the AMA and NIH, have recommended that such materials be written at or below a 6th-grade level. We therefore aimed to evaluate the readability of patient information publications provided by the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS). METHODS: Patient information publications were collected from the ASMBS webpage (https://asmbs.org/patients) and evaluated for readability. Microsoft Office was utilized to calculate Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) scores. Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) is a 0-100 score, with higher scores equating to easier reading (≥80 = 6th-grade reading level). Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) rates text on a US grade school level. Qualitative and univariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: Eleven patient information publications were evaluated. None of the publications achieved an FRE score of 80 or an FKGL of a 6th-grade reading level. The average FRE score was 35.8 (range 14.9-53.6). The average FKGL score was 13.1 (range 10.1-17.5). The publication with the highest FRE and lowest FKGL (best readability) was that for benefits of weight loss. The brochure with the lowest FRE and highest FKGL (worst readability) was that for Medical Tourism. CONCLUSIONS: Although the ASMBS patient information publications are a trusted source of patient literature, none of the 11 publications met the recommended criteria for patient readability. Further refinement of these will be needed to provide the appropriate reading level for the average patient.

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.

Assessment of Internet Available Patient Information on Chronic Pancreatitis Using the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients Tool: A Systematic Search and Evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a relevant chronic medical problem whereby delayed presentation and poor patient understanding can cause adverse effects. Quality of patient information available on the internet about CP is not known. METHODS: A systematic review of the information about CP available online using the search term "chronic pancreatitis" in using the search engine Google has been conducted. The quality of the top 100 websites returned from this search term was analysed using the validated Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) tool (maximum score 36). Additional items were included in the website analysis specific to CP. RESULTS: In total, 45 websites were eligible for analysis. The median EQIP score of the websites was 16 (interquartile range 12-19.5). The majority of websites originated from the USA and the United Kingdom with 31 and 11 websites, respectively. Provision of additional information was inconsistent, with most websites covering information regarding aetiology and advocating alcohol and tobacco cessation, but only few reporting on more complex issues. CONCLUSION: Internet available information about CP is of limited quality. There is an immediate need for high quality, patient targeted, and informative literature accessible on the internet about this topic.

Assessment of acute asthma in children: do parents and healthcare providers speak the same language?

OBJECTIVE: Education and self-management plans enhance parents' self-efficacy in managing their child's asthma symptoms. By understanding how parents recognize and interpret acute asthma symptoms, we can compile patient information using terms that are familiar to parents. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 27 parents of children with asthma aged 2-12 years. The interviewees were selected from three groups: parents of children admitted for acute asthma, parents of children receiving outpatient asthma care, and parents who had access to a self-management plan. Parents were invited to report symptoms they would associate with acute asthma. Subsequently, parents were queried about their recognition of symptoms from a predefined list and asked to explain how they would assess these symptoms in case their child would experience an attack of acute asthma. RESULTS: The most frequently reported symptoms for acute asthma were shortness of breath (77.8%) and coughing (63%). Other signs such as retractions, nasal flaring, and wheezing were reported by less than 25% of the parents. All parents recognized shortness of breath, wheezing and gasping for breath from a predefined list of medical terms. Retractions and nasal flaring were recognized by 81.5% and 66.7% of the parents, respectively. Recognizing the medical terms did not necessarily translate into parents being able to explain how to assess these symptoms. CONCLUSION: Parents and healthcare professionals do not always speak the same language concerning symptoms of acute asthma. This may hamper timely recognition and adequate self-management, highlighting the necessity to adjust current medical information about acute asthma.

Education and self-management plans enhance parents' self-efficacy in managing their child's asthma symptoms.Parents may identify symptoms of acute asthma differently than healthcare providersInformation material about acute asthma should be adjusted to empower parents to decide when to commence treatment and when to seek medical attention.

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.

Assisted reproductive technology (ART) patient information-seeking behavior: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 13% of women in the United States of reproductive age seek infertility services. Assisted reproductive technology (ART), including in vitro fertilization, is used to help patients achieve pregnancy. Many people are not familiar with these treatments prior to becoming patients and possess knowledge gaps about care. METHODS: This study employed qualitative methods to investigate how patients interact with information sources during care. Patients who underwent ART including embryo transfer between January 2017 and April 2022 at a large urban healthcare center were eligible. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted between August and October 2022. Fifteen females with an average age of 39 years participated. Reflexive thematic analysis was performed. RESULTS: Two main themes emerged. Participants (1) utilized clinic-provided information and then turned to outside sources to fill knowledge gaps; (2) struggled to learn about costs, insurance, and mental health resources to support care. Participants preferred clinic-provided resources and then utilized academic sources, the internet, and social media when they had unfulfilled information needs. Knowledge gaps related to cost, insurance, and mental health support were reported. CONCLUSION: ART clinics can consider providing more information about cost, insurance, and mental health support to patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Massachusetts General Hospital Institutional Review Board approved this study (#2022P000474) and informed consent was obtained from each participant.

Recommendations to improve use and dissemination of patient versions of oncological clinical practice guidelines in Germany: results of a multi-stakeholder workshop.

BACKGROUND: Oncological patients have high information needs that are often unmet. Patient versions of oncological clinical practice guidelines (PVG) translate clinical practice guidelines into laypersons' language and might help to address patients' information needs. Currently, 30 oncological PVG have been published in Germany and more are being developed. Following a large multi-phase project on oncological PVGs in Germany, recommendations to improve use and dissemination of PVG were adopted in a multi-stakeholder workshop. METHODS: Organisations representing users of PVGs (patients, medical personnel, and multipliers), creators, initiators/funding organisations of PVGs, and organisations with methodological expertise in the development of clinical practice guidelines or in patient health information were invited to participate. The workshop included a World Café for discussion of pre-selected recommendations and structured consensus procedure for of all recommendations. Recommendations with agreement of > 75% were approved, and in case of ≤ 75% agreement, recommendations were rejected. RESULTS: The workshop took place on 24th April 2023 in Cologne, Germany. Overall, 23 people from 24 organisations participated in the discussion. Of 35 suggested recommendations 28 recommendations reached consensus and were approved. The recommendations referred to the topics dissemination (N = 13), design and format (N = 7), (digital) links (N = 5), digitalisation (N = 4), up-to-dateness (N = 3), and use of the PVG in collaboration between healthcare providers and patients (N = 3). CONCLUSION: The practical recommendations consider various perspectives and can help to improve use and dissemination of oncological PVG in Germany. The inclusion of different stakeholders could facilitate the transfer of the results into practice.

Use, applicability, and dissemination of patient versions of clinical practice guidelines in oncology in Germany: a qualitative interview study with healthcare providers.

BACKGROUND: People with cancer have high information needs; however, they are often inadequately met. Patient versions of clinical practice guidelines (PVGs), a special form of evidence-based information, translate patient-relevant recommendations from clinical practice guidelines into lay language. To date, little is known about the experience of PVGs from healthcare providers' perspective in healthcare. This study aims to investigate the use, applicability, and dissemination of PVGs in oncology from the healthcare providers' perspective in Germany. METHODS: Twenty semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with oncological healthcare providers in Germany between October and December 2021. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Mayring's qualitative content analysis with MAXQDA software was utilised to analyse the data. RESULTS: A total of 20 healthcare providers (14 female, 6 male), mainly working as psychotherapists/psycho-oncologists and physicians, participated. Most participants (75%) were aware of the existence of PVGs. The content was predominantly perceived as comprehensible and relevant, whereas opinions on the design and format were mixed. The perceived lack of up-to-date information limited participants' trust in the content. Most felt that PVGs positively impact healthcare owing to the fact that they improve patients' knowledge about their disease. Additionally, PVGs served as a guide and helped healthcare providers structure physician-patient talks. Healthcare provider's unawareness of the existence of PVGs was cited as an obstructive factor to its dissemination to patients. CONCLUSION: Limited knowledge of the existence of PVGs among healthcare providers, coupled with alternative patient information, hinders the use and dissemination of PVGs in healthcare. However, the applicability of PVGs seemed to be acceptable owing to their content and good comprehensibility, especially with respect to physician-patient communication.

Barriers and facilitators in developing patient versions of clinical practice guidelines - qualitative interviews on experiences of international guideline producers.

BACKGROUND: Several guideline organizations produce patient versions of clinical practice guidelines (PVGs) which translate recommendations into simple language. A former study of our working group revealed that few guideline organizations publish their methods used to develop PVGs. Clear definitions of PVGs do not prevail and their purposes often remain unclear. We aimed to explore experts' perspectives on developing, disseminating and implementing PVGs to discuss and incorporate these experiences when consenting on methodological guidance and further improving PVGs. METHODS: We conducted 17 semi-structured telephone interviews with international experts working with PVGs from September 2021 through January 2022. We conducted the interviews in English or German, they were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We utilized Mayring's qualitative content analysis with MAXQDA software to analyze the data. RESULTS: In two interviews two participants were interviewed at the same time. This resulted in a total of 19 participants from 16 different organizations and eight different countries participated. Most were female (16/19) and their experience in working with PVGs ranged from 1 to 20 years. All follow methodological standards when developing PVGs, but the extent of these standards and their public accessibility differs. Aims and target groups of PVGs vary between organizations. Facilitators for developing PVGs are working with a multidisciplinary team, financial resources, consultation processes and a high-quality underlying CPG. Facilitators for disseminating and implementing PVGs are using various strategies. Barriers, on the other hand, are the lack of these factors. All participants mentioned patient involvement as a key aspect in PVG development. CONCLUSION: The steps in the PVG development process are largely similar across the countries. Focus is placed on the involvement of patients in the development process, although the extent of participation varies. The experts collectively attribute great importance to PVGs overall, but in order to constantly adapt to medical progress and changing conditions, the focus in the future may be more on formats like living guidelines. Although there are different views on the mandatory development of PVGs, there is a consistent call for more transparency regarding the methodology used for PVGs.

"Doctor ChatGPT, Can You Help Me?" The Patient's Perspective: Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence and the language models derived from it, such as ChatGPT, offer immense possibilities, particularly in the field of medicine. It is already evident that ChatGPT can provide adequate and, in some cases, expert-level responses to health-related queries and advice for patients. However, it is currently unknown how patients perceive these capabilities, whether they can derive benefit from them, and whether potential risks, such as harmful suggestions, are detected by patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to clarify whether patients can get useful and safe health care advice from an artificial intelligence chatbot assistant. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted using 100 publicly available health-related questions from 5 medical specialties (trauma, general surgery, otolaryngology, pediatrics, and internal medicine) from a web-based platform for patients. Responses generated by ChatGPT-4.0 and by an expert panel (EP) of experienced physicians from the aforementioned web-based platform were packed into 10 sets consisting of 10 questions each. The blinded evaluation was carried out by patients regarding empathy and usefulness (assessed through the question: "Would this answer have helped you?") on a scale from 1 to 5. As a control, evaluation was also performed by 3 physicians in each respective medical specialty, who were additionally asked about the potential harm of the response and its correctness. RESULTS: In total, 200 sets of questions were submitted by 64 patients (mean 45.7, SD 15.9 years; 29/64, 45.3% male), resulting in 2000 evaluated answers of ChatGPT and the EP each. ChatGPT scored higher in terms of empathy (4.18 vs 2.7; P<.001) and usefulness (4.04 vs 2.98; P<.001). Subanalysis revealed a small bias in terms of levels of empathy given by women in comparison with men (4.46 vs 4.14; P=.049). Ratings of ChatGPT were high regardless of the participant's age. The same highly significant results were observed in the evaluation of the respective specialist physicians. ChatGPT outperformed significantly in correctness (4.51 vs 3.55; P<.001). Specialists rated the usefulness (3.93 vs 4.59) and correctness (4.62 vs 3.84) significantly lower in potentially harmful responses from ChatGPT (P<.001). This was not the case among patients. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that ChatGPT is capable of supporting patients in health-related queries better than physicians, at least in terms of written advice through a web-based platform. In this study, ChatGPT's responses had a lower percentage of potentially harmful advice than the web-based EP. However, it is crucial to note that this finding is based on a specific study design and may not generalize to all health care settings. Alarmingly, patients are not able to independently recognize these potential dangers.

Characterizing the Adoption and Experiences of Users of Artificial Intelligence-Generated Health Information in the United States: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.

BACKGROUND: OpenAI's ChatGPT is a source of advanced online health information (OHI) that may be integrated into individuals' health information-seeking routines. However, concerns have been raised about its factual accuracy and impact on health outcomes. To forecast implications for medical practice and public health, more information is needed on who uses the tool, how often, and for what. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to characterize the reasons for and types of ChatGPT OHI use and describe the users most likely to engage with the platform. METHODS: In this cross-sectional survey, patients received invitations to participate via the ResearchMatch platform, a nonprofit affiliate of the National Institutes of Health. A web-based survey measured demographic characteristics, use of ChatGPT and other sources of OHI, experience characterization, and resultant health behaviors. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Both 2-tailed t tests and Pearson chi-square tests were used to compare users of ChatGPT OHI to nonusers. RESULTS: Of 2406 respondents, 21.5% (n=517) respondents reported using ChatGPT for OHI. ChatGPT users were younger than nonusers (32.8 vs 39.1 years, P<.001) with lower advanced degree attainment (BA or higher; 49.9% vs 67%, P<.001) and greater use of transient health care (ED and urgent care; P<.001). ChatGPT users were more avid consumers of general non-ChatGPT OHI (percentage of weekly or greater OHI seeking frequency in past 6 months, 28.2% vs 22.8%, P<.001). Around 39.3% (n=206) respondents endorsed using the platform for OHI 2-3 times weekly or more, and most sought the tool to determine if a consultation was required (47.4%, n=245) or to explore alternative treatment (46.2%, n=239). Use characterization was favorable as many believed ChatGPT to be just as or more useful than other OHIs (87.7%, n=429) and their doctor (81%, n=407). About one-third of respondents requested a referral (35.6%, n=184) or changed medications (31%, n=160) based on the information received from ChatGPT. As many users reported skepticism regarding the ChatGPT output (67.9%, n=336), most turned to their physicians (67.5%, n=349). CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the significant role of AI-generated OHI in shaping health-seeking behaviors and the potential evolution of patient-provider interactions. Given the proclivity of these users to enact health behavior changes based on AI-generated content, there is an opportunity for physicians to guide ChatGPT OHI users on an informed and examined use of the technology.

Thematic coverage and readability of online patient information on cochlear implant care.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of patients with a cochlear implant (CI) is usually an elective, complex and interdisciplinary process. As an important source of information, patients often access the internet prior to treatment. The quality of internet-based information regarding thematic coverage has not yet been analysed in detail. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyse the information on CI care available on the internet regarding its thematic coverage and readability. MATERIAL METHODS: Eight search phrases related to CI care were defined as part of the study. A checklist for completeness of thematic coverage was then created for each search phrase. The current German CI clinical practice guideline and the white paper on CI care in Germany were used as a basis. As a further parameter, readability was assessed using Flesch Reading Ease Scores. The search phrases were used for an internet search with Google. The first ten results were then analysed with regard to thematic coverage, readability and the provider of the website. RESULTS: A total of 80 websites were identified, which were set up by 54 different providers (16 providers were found in multiple entries) from eight different provider groups. The average completeness of thematic coverage was 41.6 ± 28.2%. Readability according to the Flesch Reading Ease Score was categorised as "hard to read" on average (34.7 ± 14.2 points, range: 0-72). There was a negative statistically significant correlation between the thematic coverage of content and readability (Spearman's rank correlation: r = - 0.413, p = 0.00014). The completeness of thematic coverage of information on CI care available on the internet was highly heterogeneous and had a significant negative correlation with the readability. This result should be taken into account by both the providers of internet information and by patients when using internet-based information on CI care and help to further improve the quality of web-based information.

Do ChatGPT and Google differ in answers to commonly asked patient questions regarding total shoulder and total elbow arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) offer a new potential resource for patient education. The answers by Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT), a LLM AI text bot, to frequently asked questions (FAQs) were compared to answers provided by a contemporary Google search to determine the reliability of information provided by these sources for patient education in upper extremity arthroplasty. METHODS: "Total shoulder arthroplasty" (TSA) and "total elbow arthroplasty" (TEA) were entered into Google Search and ChatGPT 3.0 to determine the ten most FAQs. On Google, the FAQs were obtained through the "people also ask" section, while ChatGPT was asked to provide the ten most FAQs. Each question, answer, and reference(s) cited were recorded. A modified version of the Rothwell system was used to categorize questions into 10 subtopics: special activities, timeline of recovery, restrictions, technical details, cost, indications/management, risks and complications, pain, longevity, and evaluation of surgery. Each reference was categorized into the following groups: commercial, academic, medical practice, single surgeon personal, or social media. Questions for TSA and TEA were combined for analysis and compared between Google and ChatGPT with a 2 sample Z-test for proportions. RESULTS: Overall, most questions were related to procedural indications or management (17.5%). There were no significant differences between Google and ChatGPT between question categories. The majority of references were from academic websites (65%). ChatGPT produced a greater number of academic references compared to Google (80% vs. 50%; P = .047), while Google more commonly provided medical practice references (25% vs. 0%; P = .017). CONCLUSION: In conjunction with patient-physician discussions, AI LLMs may provide a reliable resource for patients. By providing information based on academic references, these tools have the potential to improve health literacy and improved shared decision making for patients searching for information about TSA and TEA. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: With the rising prevalence of AI programs, it is essential to understand how these applications affect patient education in medicine.

Evaluating the web as a source of information for patients with chest wall deformities: insights into engagement and disparities.

BACKGROUND: Recent data highlight the internet's pivotal role as the primary information source for patients. In this study, we emulate a patient's/caregiver's quest for online information concerning chest deformities and assess the quality of available information. METHODS: We conducted an internet search using combination of the terms "pectus excavatum," "pectus excavatum surgery," "funnel chest," "pectus excavatum repair" and identified the first 100 relevant websites from the three most popular search engines: Google, Yahoo, and Bing. These websites were evaluated using the modified Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) instrument. RESULTS: Of the 300 websites generated, 140 (46.7%) were included in our evaluation after elimination of duplicates, non-English websites, and those targeting medical professionals. The EQIP scores in the final sample ranged from 8 to 32/36, with a median score of 22. Most of the evaluated websites (32.8%) originated from hospitals, yet none met all 36 EQIP criteria. DISCUSSION: None of the evaluated websites pertaining to pectus excavatum achieved a flawless "content quality" score. The diverse array of websites potentially complicates patients' efforts to navigate toward high-quality resources. Barriers in accessing high-quality online patient information may contribute to disparities in referral, patient engagement, treatment satisfaction, and overall quality of life. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

What Parents of Children Born with a Cleft Lip and/or Palate Want to Know About the Care for their Child.

OBJECTIVE: Adequate health information that matches the needs of care recipients is a prerequisite for patient-centered care. To facilitate the provision of tailored and timely information, it isimportant to understand the information needs of parents of children and adolescents with cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) themselves, and in addition they were asked how they experienced the provided care-related information. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study employing questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Participants were recruited from a cleft palate-craniofacial care unit in a major tertiary hospital in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were parents or guardians of children with CL/P, and two adolescents with CLP. They were recruited through the outpatient clinic during multidisciplinary consultation or after clinical admission. RESULTS: In total, fifty-five questionnaires were completed by parents or guardians and eleven interviews were conducted with nine parents of children with CL/P and two adolescents with CL/P. In general, participants reported to be satisfied with provided information during hospital admission or multidisciplinary cleft team consultations (mean 8.0, scale 0-10). In addition, 25.5% (n = 14) indicated that information to prepare for hospital admission was lacking (eg, practical information). Thematic qualitative analysis yielded five main information needs: 1) Clear communication during the care process, 2) Overview of the care trajectory, 3) Specific care plan information, 4) Presentation of information and 5) Guidance and support. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings emphasize the importance of gaining insights into wishes and information needs from care recipients who can provide insights in their information needs. With these findings, information provision should be redesigned to improve and to foster the further transition to family-centered care.

Internet and social media preferences of orthopaedic patients vary according to factors such as age and education levels.

BACKGROUND: Patients can often access the internet and social media for health information but it is not clear how much they trust and use the information retrieved. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the social media and internet use rates and preferences of orthopaedic patients, to reveal to what extent they self-treat, and to probe the affecting factors. METHODS: Two thousand fifty-eight patients admitted to an orthopaedic polyclinic were asked to fill out a survey (voluntarily) consisting of 15 items, to collect demographic data, preference for platforms and sources used, trusted sources, and the extent to which information obtained was used for self-care. RESULTS: The most preferred and most trusted sources of information were Google and other search engines, and physicians' personal websites (p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Variables such as age, gender, educational level and occupation affect the research preferences. Reliance on social media decreases with increasing educational levels (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Health information and knowledge services should work with health professionals to improve aspects of health literacy among orthopaedic patients.

Increasing the public awareness of justification.

One of the requirements of the UK Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations 2017 is that all medical exposures must be justified before the exposure can proceed. One of the main elements of justification is a determination that the medical benefits from the exposure will exceed the associated radiation detriment. The field of medical exposure to ionising radiation is in the rare position of having this explicit legal requirement for net benefit. In this article it is argued that, although separate information on benefit and detriment is also required for implied or explicit informed consent prior to exposure, justification comes first, is simple to explain, and is easily related to the commonly understood basis of medical ethics. It seems reasonable, therefore, to make patients and the public more aware of the protection that UK law already provides for them. A proposal for a single-sentence general statement on justification is made.

Bruxism treatment on Youtube: evaluating reliability and information accuracy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the content and quality of videos about bruxism treatments on YouTube, a platform frequently used by patients today to obtain information. METHODS: A YouTube search was performed using the keywords "bruxism treatment" and "teeth grinding treatment". "The sort by relevance" filter was used for both search terms and the first 150 videos were saved. A total of 139 videos that met the study criteria were included in the study. Videos were classified as poor, moderate or excellent based on a usefulness score that evaluated content quality. The modified DISCERN tool was also used to evaluate video quality. Additionally, videos were categorized according to the upload source, target audience and video type. The types of treatments mentioned in the videos and the demographic data of the videos were recorded. RESULTS: According to the usefulness score, 59% of the videos were poor-quality, 36.7% were moderate-quality and 4.3% were excellent-quality. Moderate-quality videos had a higher interaction index than excellent-quality videos (p = 0.039). The video duration of excellent-quality videos was longer than that of moderate and poor-quality videos (p = 0.024, p = 0.002). Videos with poor-quality content were found to have significantly lower DISCERN scores than videos with moderate (p < 0.001) and excellent-quality content (p = 0.008). Additionally, there was a significantly positive and moderate (r = 0.446) relationship between DISCERN scores and content usefulness scores (p < 0.001). There was only a weak positive correlation between DISCERN scores and video length (r = 0.359; p < 0.001). The videos uploaded by physiotherapists had significantly higher views per day and viewing rate than videos uploaded by medical doctors (p = 0.037), university-hospital-institute (p = 0.024) and dentists (p = 0.006). The videos uploaded by physiotherapists had notably higher number of likes and number of comments than videos uploaded by medical doctors (p = 0.023; p = 0.009, respectively), university-hospital-institute (p = 0.003; p = 0.008, respectively) and dentists (p = 0.002; p = 0.002, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although the majority of videos on YouTube about bruxism treatments are produced by professionals, most of the videos contain limited information, which may lead patients to debate treatment methods. Health professionals should warn patients against this potentially misleading content and direct them to reliable sources.