ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2019
Quality Assessment of Websites Providing Information on Human Papillomavirus Vaccines in Thailand.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality evaluation of HPV vaccine-related online messages in China: a cross-sectional study.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the quality of websites that provide information about human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination using the criteria laid out by the World Health Organization Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety.
methodsThis study assessed the quality of 154 Thai-language websites accessible in November 2018 via the three most popular search engines. Differences in scores were reported as mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI).
resultsWith regard to credibility, all of the websites examined indicated their mission but, in most cases (91.6%), lacked transparency with regard to sponsorship. In terms of content, almost all of the websites (97.4%) met our writing/editing and content accuracy standards but did not provide complete information regarding the benefits of vaccination or adverse events associated with it. None of the websites contained information regarding their editorial/review process. All of the websites were accessible and were designed to be adaptable to mobile device screens. News and personal websites had lower credit scores than those of academic institutions (MD -0.63, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.20; MD -0.71, 95% CI -1.16 to -0.25, respectively).
conclusionMost of the websites met standards in terms of writing/editing and content accuracy. However, fundamental information regarding the benefits and adverse events associated with HPV vaccination were infrequently reported, the editorial process and transparency issues were rarely addressed.
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.