ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2008
Role of information available over the internet: what are the parents of children undergoing tonsillectomy likely to find?
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- YouTube™ as an information source for larynx cancer: a systematic review of video content.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2020Pooled it
- The Impact of a Text Messaging Service (Tonsil-Text-To-Me) on Pediatric Perioperative Tonsillectomy Outcomes: Cohort Study With a Historical Control Group.JMIR perioperative medicine · 2022Article
- Quality of the Italian Websites for Parental Guidance on the Indications for Tonsillectomy in Children.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2021Article
- An investigation of the information provided to the parents of young people with mental health needs on an internet forum.Internet interventions · 2021Article
- Indian endocrine surgery websites are they comparable?Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2020Article
- Reframing healthy food choices: a content analysis of Australian healthy eating blogs.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Quality and readability of online patient information regarding sclerotherapy for venous malformations.Pediatric radiology · 2018Article
- Consulting Dr. Google: Quality of Online Resources About Tympanostomy Tube Placement.The Laryngoscope · 2018Article
- Evaluation of Quality and Readability of Health Information Websites Identified through India's Major Search Engines.Advances in preventive medicine · 2016Article
- Quality evaluation of the available Internet information regarding pain during orthodontic treatment.The Angle orthodontist · 2013Article
- Comprehensiveness, readability, and reliability of Brazilian websites available for lay people's guidance on adenotonsillectomy.Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngologyArticle
- [What does the Internet teach the obstetric patient about labor analgesia?]Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Article
- Quality of information available over internet on laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
- Analysis of the quality of online resources for parents of children who are late to talk.Autism & developmental language impairmentsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was to assess the quality of information available on the world wide web to parents of children undergoing tonsillectomy. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe main data source was from internet searches using the five most popular search engines and the keyword 'tonsillectomy' with default settings. The first 50 web links in each search were evaluated with the LIDA Instrument (assessing accessibility, usability and reliability criteria). We also assessed the readability of the sites using the Flesch reading ease score (FRES).
resultsOf the 250 possible links, 113 new links were included the remaining being repetitions, inactive links or restricted access sites. The websites had an average accessibility score of 42/63 (66.7%; range, 26-57), a usability score of 29/54 (53.7%; range, 7-49), and a reliability score of 17/51 (33.3%; range, 0-49). The Flesch reading ease score was 43.8 (range, 3-84.4).
conclusionsHealth information available on the internet varies greatly. Highly ranked websites on popular search engines may not be the most reliable. Overall, the websites had low scores for reliability, with poor engagability, content production and conflict of interest declaration. Patients should be given previously assessed references on the internet to prevent them being misled by inaccurate or commercially motivated information.
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.