Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28545569›Full record

ArticleJournal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale2017

Identifying high quality medical education websites in Otolaryngology: a guide for medical students and residents.

Nathan Yang, Sarah Hosseini, Marco A Mascarella, Meredith Young, Nancy Posel, Kevin Fung, Lily H P Nguyen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Nathan YangFaculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Sarah HosseiniFaculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Marco A MascarellaDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Meredith YoungCenter for Medical Education, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Nancy PoselMcGill Molson Medical Informatics, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Kevin FungDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Lily H P NguyenDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. lily.hp.nguyen@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLearners often utilize online resources to supplement formalized curricula, and to appropriately support learning, these resources should be of high quality. Thus, the objectives of this study are to develop and provide validity evidence supporting an assessment tool designed to assess the quality of educational websites in Otolaryngology- Head & Neck Surgery (ORL-HNS), and identify those that could support effective web-based learning.

methodsAfter a literature review, the Modified Education in Otolaryngology Website (MEOW) assessment tool was designed by a panel of experts based on a previously validated website assessment tool. A search strategy using a Google-based search engine was used subsequently to identify websites. Those that were free of charge and in English were included. Websites were coded for whether their content targeted medical students or residents. Using the MEOW assessment tool, two independent raters scored the websites. Inter-rater and intra-rater reliability were evaluated, and scores were compared to recommendations from a content expert.

resultsThe MEOW assessment tool included a total of 20 items divided in 8 categories related to authorship, frequency of revision, content accuracy, interactivity, visual presentation, navigability, speed and recommended hyperlinks. A total of 43 out of 334 websites identified by the search met inclusion criteria. The scores generated by our tool appeared to differentiate higher quality websites from lower quality ones: websites that the expert "would recommend" scored 38.4 (out of 56; CI [34.4-42.4]) and "would not recommend" 27.0 (CI [23.2-30.9]). Inter-rater and intra-rater intraclass correlation coefficient were greater than 0.7.

conclusionsUsing the MEOW assessment tool, high quality ORL-HNS educational websites were identified.

Indexed as

CurriculumEducation, DistanceInternetInternship and ResidencyHumansOtolaryngologyAssessment toolMedical educationOnline resources

Identifiers

PMID28545569
PMCPMC5445285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.