ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2017
Toward automated assessment of health Web page quality using the DISCERN instrument.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Bring on the Machines: Could Machine Learning Improve the Quality of Patient Education Materials? A Systematic Search and Rapid Review.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2018Pooled it
- How reliable is youtube as a platform for cochlear implant information?Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- Enhancing trustworthiness of Arabic online health information quality evaluation using an enhanced BERT architecture with PCA and ICA feature weighting.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Development of a robust corpus for automated evaluation of online health information in Chinese using the DISCERN scale.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Assessing the quality and reliability of health information on GLP-1 receptor agonists on TikTok and Bilibili: a cross-sectional analysis of the public health infodemic.Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism · 2026Article
- Assessing the quality of Japanese online breast cancer treatment information using large language models: a comparison of ChatGPT, Claude, and expert evaluations.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2025Article
- Article
- Evaluation of ChatGPT-4 Performance in Answering Patients' Questions About the Management of Type 2 Diabetes.Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni · 2024Article
- Quality Assessment of Online Resources for Gender-affirming Surgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- Digital Patient Education on Xanthelasma Palpebrarum: A Content Analysis.Clinics and practice · 2023Article
- Quality analysis of YouTube videos about thyroid orbitopathy.International ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Evaluation of quality, readability, suitability, and usefulness of online resources available to cancer survivors.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2023Review
- Article
- Proximal Humerus Fracture: An Evaluation of the Readability and Value of Web-Based Knowledge.Cureus · 2022Article
- Assessment of the quality of information on treatment of keratoconus on YouTube.International ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Readability and Quality Assessment of Online Materials for Syndactyly Release.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2022Article
- AutoDiscern: rating the quality of online health information with hierarchical encoder attention-based neural networks.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- Fiction, Falsehoods, and Few Facts: Cross-Sectional Study on the Content-Related Quality of Atopic Eczema-Related Videos on YouTube.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Patient-centered web-based information on oral lichen planus: Quality and readability.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2019Article
- Evaluating online health information quality using machine learning and deep learning: A systematic literature review.Digital healthReview
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
backgroundAs the Internet becomes the number one destination for obtaining health-related information, there is an increasing need to identify health Web pages that convey an accurate and current view of medical knowledge. In response, the research community has created multicriteria instruments for reliably assessing online medical information quality. One such instrument is DISCERN, which measures health Web page quality by assessing an array of features. In order to scale up use of the instrument, there is interest in automating the quality evaluation process by building machine learning (ML)-based DISCERN Web page classifiers.
objectiveThe paper addresses 2 key issues that are essential before constructing automated DISCERN classifiers: (1) generation of a robust DISCERN training corpus useful for training classification algorithms, and (2) assessment of the usefulness of the current DISCERN scoring schema as a metric for evaluating the performance of these algorithms.
methodsUsing DISCERN, 272 Web pages discussing treatment options in breast cancer, arthritis, and depression were evaluated and rated by trained coders. First, different consensus models were compared to obtain a robust aggregated rating among the coders, suitable for a DISCERN ML training corpus. Second, a new DISCERN scoring criterion was proposed (features-based score) as an ML performance metric that is more reflective of the score distribution across different DISCERN quality criteria.
resultsFirst, we found that a probabilistic consensus model applied to the DISCERN instrument was robust against noise (random ratings) and superior to other approaches for building a training corpus. Second, we found that the established DISCERN scoring schema (overall score) is ill-suited to measure ML performance for automated classifiers.
conclusionUse of a probabilistic consensus model is advantageous for building a training corpus for the DISCERN instrument, and use of a features-based score is an appropriate ML metric for automated DISCERN classifiers. AVAILABILITY: The code for the probabilistic consensus model is available at https://bitbucket.org/A_2/em_dawid/ .
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.