ArticleInteractive journal of medical research2015
Third Molars on the Internet: A Guide for Assessing Information Quality and Readability.
Article in Interactive journal of medical research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of the Quality and Readability of Web-Based Arabic Health Information on Halitosis: Infodemiological Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- YouTube™ as a source of information on extraction of third molars.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2021Article
- Forecasting Erroneous Neural Machine Translation of Disease Symptoms: Development of Bayesian Probabilistic Classifiers for Cross-Lingual Health Translation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Adverse Effects of Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy for Common Malignancies: What Is the Quality of Information Patients Are Finding Online?Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021Article
- Are health websites credible enough for elderly self-education in the most prevalent elderly diseases?BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
- Detecting Symptom Errors in Neural Machine Translation of Patient Health Information on Depressive Disorders: Developing Interpretable Bayesian Machine Learning Classifiers.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Radiation Oncology Online: Quality, Strategies, and Disparities.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2020Article
- Persian language health websites on Ebola disease: less credible than you think?The Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association · 2020Article
- Disparity in online health information in pediatric vs. adult surgical conditions.Pediatric surgery international · 2019Article
- Websites as a tool for public health education: determining the trustworthiness of health websites on Ebola disease.Online journal of public health informatics · 2018Article
- Article
- Thoracic Surgery Information on the Internet: A Multilingual Quality Assessment.Interactive journal of medical research · 2017Article
- Website Sharing in Online Health Communities: A Descriptive Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2016Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDirecting patients suffering from third molars (TMs) problems to high-quality online information is not only medically important, but also could enable better engagement in shared decision making.
objectivesThis study aimed to develop a scale that measures the scientific information quality (SIQ) for online information concerning wisdom tooth problems and to conduct a quality evaluation for online TMs resources. In addition, the study evaluated whether a specific piece of readability software (Readability Studio Professional 2012) might be reliable in measuring information comprehension, and explored predictors for the SIQ Scale.
methodsA cross-sectional sample of websites was retrieved using certain keywords and phrases such as "impacted wisdom tooth problems" using 3 popular search engines. The retrieved websites (n=150) were filtered. The retained 50 websites were evaluated to assess their characteristics, usability, accessibility, trust, readability, SIQ, and their credibility using DISCERN and Health on the Net Code (HoNCode).
resultsWebsites' mean scale scores varied significantly across website affiliation groups such as governmental, commercial, and treatment provider bodies. The SIQ Scale had a good internal consistency (alpha=.85) and was significantly correlated with DISCERN (r=.82, P<.01) and HoNCode (r=.38, P<.01). Less than 25% of websites had SIQ scores above 75%. The mean readability grade (10.3, SD 1.9) was above the recommended level, and was significantly correlated with the Scientific Information Comprehension Scale (r=.45. P<.01), which provides evidence for convergent validity. Website affiliation and DISCERN were significantly associated with SIQ (P<.01) and explained 76% of the SIQ variance.
conclusionThe developed SIQ Scale was found to demonstrate reliability and initial validity. Website affiliation, DISCERN, and HoNCode were significant predictors for the quality of scientific information. The Readability Studio software estimates were associated with scientific information comprehensiveness measures.
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.