Quality appraisal of educational websites about osteoporosis and bone health.
Education
Osteoporosis
Patient
Quality reporting
Websites
Journal
Archives of osteoporosis
ISSN: 1862-3514
Titre abrégé: Arch Osteoporos
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101318988
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 02 2021
10 02 2021
Historique:
received:
01
09
2020
accepted:
25
12
2020
entrez:
10
2
2021
pubmed:
11
2
2021
medline:
2
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Bone health education publicly available through the Internet, if evidence-based and unbiased, could help patients deal with issues such as decision-making, maintaining healthy lifestyles, using medications correctly, and improving their communication with health professionals. We performed an environmental scan and quality assessment of the currently available osteoporosis and bone health patient education information on the World Wide Web. The sample websites were identified by using three separate search tools: Google Advanced, Bing, and Ask.com . Two independent investigators collected data and appraised the quality of selected websites. We identified 48 websites. Most websites were focused on risks factors of osteoporosis, preventive measures, screening recommendations, and topics to discuss with the physician. All websites provided adequate information describing treatment options; however, only 36% had information addressing duration of treatment, what happens when treatment stops, and the benefits and risks of various treatments. A total of 55% of the websites had their content updated to 2019 and 68% cited their sources of information to support their content. Reading levels ranged from 7.5 to 15.2 (higher than the recommended 6-grade level). Websites with information about bone health and osteoporosis commonly present information about initial treatment choices, but most fail to address risk-benefit issues, and common barriers than can occur throughout the course of the disease. In addition, many websites did not update their content, did not cite their sources of information, or were written at a 9-grade level or above (rendering them unsuitable for low-literacy populations).
Identifiants
pubmed: 33566216
doi: 10.1007/s11657-021-00877-x
pii: 10.1007/s11657-021-00877-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
28Références
Fact Sheets | Pew Research Center (2017) http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/
Risk A, Dzenowagis J (2001) Review of internet health information quality initiatives. J Med Internet Res 3(4):E28. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3.4.e28
doi: 10.2196/jmir.3.4.e28
pubmed: 11772543
pmcid: 1761913
RAND Health (2001) Proceed with caution: a report on the quality of health information on the Internet.
Hesse BW, Nelson DE, Kreps GL, Croyle RT, Arora NK, Rimer BK, Viswanath K (2005) 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. Arch Intern Med 165(22):2618–2624. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.165.22.2618
doi: 10.1001/archinte.165.22.2618
pubmed: 16344419
Abdel-Wahab N, Rai D, Siddhanamatha H, Dodeja A, Suarez-Almazor ME, Lopez-Olivo MA (2019) A comprehensive scoping review to identify standards for the development of health information resources on the internet. PLoS One 14(6):e0218342. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218342
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218342
pubmed: 31220126
pmcid: 6586310
Siddhanamatha HR, Heung E, Lopez-Olivo MLA, Abdel-Wahab N, Ojeda-Prias A, Willcockson I, Leong A, Suarez-Almazor ME (2017) Quality assessment of websites providing educational content for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 46(6):715–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semarthrit.2017.01.006
doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2017.01.006
pubmed: 28258768
Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa ER (2002) Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. Jama 287(20):2691–2700
doi: 10.1001/jama.287.20.2691
Lewiecki EM, Rudolph LA, Kiebzak GM, Chavez JR, Thorpe BM (2006) Assessment of osteoporosis-website quality. Osteoporos Int 17(5):741–752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-005-0042-5
doi: 10.1007/s00198-005-0042-5
pubmed: 16447010
Camacho PM, Petak SM, Binkley N, Clarke BL, Harris ST, Hurley DL, Kleerekoper M, Lewiecki EM, Miller PD, Narula HS, Pessah-Pollack R, Tangpricha V, Wimalawansa SJ, Watts NB (2016) American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Endocr Pract 22(Suppl 4):1–42. https://doi.org/10.4158/ep161435.gl
doi: 10.4158/ep161435.gl
pubmed: 27662240
Qaseem A, Forciea MA, McLean RM, Denberg TD (2017) Treatment of low bone density or osteoporosis to prevent fractures in men and women: a clinical practice guideline update from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 166(11):818–839. https://doi.org/10.7326/m15-1361
doi: 10.7326/m15-1361
pubmed: 28492856
Buckley L, Guyatt G, Fink HA, Cannon M, Grossman J, Hansen KE, Humphrey MB, Lane NE, Magrey M, Miller M, Morrison L, Rao M, Robinson AB, Saha S, Wolver S, Bannuru RR, Vaysbrot E, Osani M, Turgunbaev M, Miller AS, McAlindon T (2017) 2017 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Arthritis Rheumatol (Hoboken, NJ) 69(8):1521–1537. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.40137
doi: 10.1002/art.40137
Stossel LM, Segar N, Gliatto P, Fallar R, Karani R (2012) Readability of patient education materials available at the point of care. J Gen Intern Med 27(9):1165–1170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2046-0
doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2046-0
pubmed: 22528620
pmcid: 3514986
Doak CC, Doak LG, Root JH (1996) Teaching patients with low literacy skills. AJN Am J Nurs 96(12):16M
doi: 10.1097/00000446-199612000-00022
Joshi MP, Bhangoo RS, Kumar K (2011) Quality of nutrition related information on the internet for osteoporosis patients: a critical review. Technol Health Care 19(6):391–400. https://doi.org/10.3233/THC-2011-0643
doi: 10.3233/THC-2011-0643
pubmed: 22129940
Perez-Lopez FR, Perez Roncero GR (2006) Assessing the content and quality of information on the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis on the World Wide Web. Gynecol Endocrinol 22(12):669–675. https://doi.org/10.1080/09513590601012603
doi: 10.1080/09513590601012603
pubmed: 17162708
Fuzzell LN, Richards MJ, Fraenkel L, Stark SL, Politi MC (2019) What information can the lay public find about osteoporosis treatment? A descriptive study coding the content and quality of bisphosphonate information on the internet. Osteoporos Int 30:2299–2310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-05008-4
doi: 10.1007/s00198-019-05008-4
pubmed: 31297567
pmcid: 6885753
Whelan AM, Jurgens TM, Bowles SK, Doyle H (2009) Efficacy of natural health products in treating osteoporosis: what is the quality of internet patient advice? Ann Pharmacother 43(5):899–907. https://doi.org/10.1345/aph.1L688
doi: 10.1345/aph.1L688
pubmed: 19417114
Wang L, Wang J, Wang M, Li Y, Liang Y, Xu D (2012) Using Internet search engines to obtain medical information: a comparative study. J Med Internet Res 14(3):e74
doi: 10.2196/jmir.1943
van Deursen AJAM, van Dijk JAGM (2009) Using the Internet: skill related problems in users’ online behavior. Interacting with Computers 21(5):393–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2009.06.005
doi: 10.1016/j.intcom.2009.06.005
Rhee RL, Von Feldt JM, Schumacher HR, Merkel PA (2013) Readability and suitability assessment of patient education materials in rheumatic diseases. Arthritis Care Res 65(10):1702–1706. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.22046
doi: 10.1002/acr.22046