ArticleThe British journal of ophthalmology2005
Evaluation of internet websites about retinopathy of prematurity patient education.
Article in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Content and Quality of Infant Feeding Smartphone Apps: Five-Year Update on a Systematic Search and Evaluation.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Pooled it
- Readability of patient education materials in ophthalmology: a single-institution study and systematic review.BMC ophthalmology · 2016Pooled it
- Developing an Instrument to Evaluate the Quality of Dementia Websites.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Interactivity, Quality, and Content of Websites Promoting Health Behaviors During Infancy: 6-Year Update of the Systematic Assessment.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Quality and reliability of web-based information regarding restorative treatment in pediatric patients.European oral research · 2021Article
- Infant Feeding Websites and Apps: A Systematic Assessment of Quality and Content.Interactive journal of medical research · 2015Article
- Adding Dimensions to the Analysis of the Quality of Health Information of Websites Returned by Google: Cluster Analysis Identifies Patterns of Websites According to their Classification and the Type of Intervention Described.Frontiers in public health · 2015Article
- Quality assessment of persian mental disorders websites using the webmedqual scale.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2014Article
- Assessing the quality, suitability and readability of internet-based health information about warfarin for patients.The Australasian medical journal · 2012Article
- Age-related macular degeneration: what do patients find on the internet?Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsThe success of the treatment in patients with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is mainly associated with timely diagnosis and appropriate management. Information dissemination is crucial for the outcome of ROP. This study aimed to evaluate the quality of the information about ROP available for patients on the internet.
methodsCross sectional study. In March 2004 the ROP information available on the internet was evaluated using two search engines (MetaCrawler and MSN) and four key terms ("retinopathy of prematurity," "premature eye," "premature retina," and "ROP"). The quality of each website was evaluated using a score system. The sites were classified as academic, organisational, or commercial. Readability, general quality of the website (based on ownership, purpose, authorship, author qualification, attribution, interactivity, and currency), and quality of the content specific to ROP (definition, causes, epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, classification, treatment, and prognosis) were analysed.
resultsOf 114 websites evaluated, 40 were included. 10 sites (25.0%) were academic, eight (20.0%) organisational, and 22 (55.0%) commercial. In the majority of the sites (62.5%) the ROP information was fair or poor.
conclusionsA large amount of information about ROP is available on the internet. However, most websites were considered incomplete.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.