ArticleAtencion primaria2006
[Questionnaire to evaluate health web sites according to European criteria].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of a Questionnaire of Food Education Content on School Catering Websites in Spain.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Online Information on Painful Sexual Dysfunction in Women: Quality Analysis of Websites in SPANISH about Dyspareunia, Vaginismus and Vulvodynia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- How good is online information on fibromyalgia? An analysis of quality and readability of websites on fibromyalgia in Spanish.BMJ open · 2020Article
- [Assessing the quality of Spanish websites providing information on visual impairment].Atencion primaria · 2019Article
- Article
- [An evaluation of the quality of health web pages using a validated questionnaire].Atencion primaria · 2011Article
- [How are the websites of pharmaceutical companies directed at users?].Atencion primaria · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo design a questionnaire to evaluate compliance with quality criteria on health web sites and to analyse its reliability.
designA descriptive study on the reliability of a questionnaire.
participantsTwenty web sites on health topics.
settingInternet. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: The questionnaire was based on analysis of content of the criteria of the e-Europe 2002 code of conduct, comparing these with the criteria underlying the AMA, the Summit code and the e-Health Code of Ethics regulations and current directives. The dimensions studied were transparency, absence of conflicts of interest, authorship, data protection, updating, accountability, and accessibility. A preliminary questionnaire was drawn up for a pilot test conducted by 3 researchers for 20 web sites, its reliability was appraised, adjustments were made and the definitive questionnaire was designed. Reliability was evaluated again for 26 web sites evaluated by 3 researchers. To evaluate concordance in the answers of the participants, Cohen's Kappa index with a 95% confidence level was used.
resultsAll the quality directives of e-Europe 2002, the European regulations and relevant points from other questionnaires were included in the questionnaire designed. Reliability was acceptable (kappa > or = 0.60) for 12 of the 18 quality criteria included. The least concordant aspects of the questionnaire were information update (kappa = 0.310) and accessibility (search for contents and access for persons with disability).
conclusionsReliability of the questionnaire designed was acceptable.
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.