ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2019
Improving the Quality of Consumer Health Information on Wikipedia: Case Series.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Wikipediautism: A Multilingual Analysis of Autism-Related Wikipedia Articles in Six Languages.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2026Article
- Strategies for crowdsourcing hearing health information: a comparative study of educational programs and volunteer-based campaigns on Wikimedia.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the Quality and Readability of Web-Based Information Regarding Foreign Bodies of the Ear, Nose, and Throat: Qualitative Content Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Public Awareness of the Fencing Response as an Indicator of Traumatic Brain Injury: Quantitative Study of Twitter and Wikipedia Data.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Wikipedia page views for health research: a review.Frontiers in big data · 2023Review
- Assessment of the digestive system malignancy information in Wikipedia and Baidu Encyclopedia: a longitudinal study.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Medical Information on Male Sexual Dysfunction on Baidu Encyclopedia and Wikipedia: Comparative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Library instruction and Wikipedia: investigating students' perceived information literacy, lifelong learning, and social responsibility through Wikipedia editing.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2022Article
- Evaluating the Psychometric Properties of the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) among Polish Social Media Users.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- A Health Information Quality Assessment Tool for Korean Online Newspaper Articles: Development Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Developing a scalable framework for partnerships between health agencies and the Wikimedia ecosystem.Research ideas and outcomes · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the Liver Disease Information in Baidu Encyclopedia and Wikipedia: Longitudinal Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Impact of the Price of Gifts From Patients on Physicians' Service Quality in Online Consultations: Empirical Study Based on Social Exchange Theory.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Situating Wikipedia as a health information resource in various contexts: A scoping review.PloS one · 2020Article
- Wikipedia: A Medical Student Educational Project to Edit Wikipedia in Preparation for Practicing Evidence-Based Pain Medicine.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
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
backgroundWikipedia is one of the most consulted health resources in the world. Since the public is using health information from Wikipedia to make health care decisions, improving the quality of that health information is in the public interest. The open editable content design of Wikipedia and quality control processes in place provide an opportunity to add high-value, evidence-based information and take an active role in improving the health care information infrastructure.
objectiveThe aim of this project was to enhance Wikipedia health pages using high-quality, current research findings and track the persistence of those edits and number of page views after the changes to assess the reach of this initiative.
methodsWe conducted Wikipedia Editathons with 3 different cohorts of Physical Therapy (PT) students to add high-quality health information to existing Wikipedia pages. Students synthesized best evidence information and updated and/or corrected existing Wikipedia entries on specific health pages. To evaluate the impact of these contributions, we examined two factors: (1) response to our contributions from the Wikipedia editing community, including number and type of subsequent edits as well as persistence of the student contributions and (2) number of page views by the public from the time of the page edits.
resultsA total of 98 PT students in 3 different cohorts engaged in Editathons, editing 24 health pages. Of the 24 edits, 22 persisted at the end of the observation period (from time of entry to May 31, 2018) and received nearly 8 million page views. Each health page had an average of 354,724 page views.
conclusionsThe Wikipedia Editathon is an effective way to continuously enhance the quality of health information available on Wikipedia. It is also an excellent way of bridging health technology with best-evidence medical facts and disseminating accurate, useful information to the public.
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.