ReviewArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2021
The Quality and Content of Internet-Based Information on Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Requires Improvement: A Systematic Review.
Review in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- ChatGPT, Claude Sonnet, and Grok Display Similarly Low Rates of Accuracy in Identifying Image-Based Orthopaedic Sports Pathologies.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Can Artificial Intelligence Educate Patients? Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT and DeepSeek Models in Meniscus Injuries.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluating DeepResearch and DeepThink in anterior cruciate ligament surgery patient education: ChatGPT-4o excels in comprehensiveness, DeepSeek R1 leads in clarity and readability of orthopaedic information.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Article
- Internet Searches Related to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury and Surgery Predominantly Relate to Management, Technical Details, and Recovery, but Quality of Websites Is Poor.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Evaluating if ChatGPT Can Answer Common Patient Questions Compared to OrthoInfo Regarding Lateral Epicondylitis.The Iowa orthopaedic journal · 2025Article
- Patients With Shoulder Labral Tears Search the Internet to Understand Their Diagnoses and Treatment Options.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Do we need a guideline for all: a qualitative study on the experiences of male athletes following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2024Article
- The Potential of ChatGPT for High-Quality Information in Patient Education for Sports Surgery.Cureus · 2024Article
- Analysis of patient-directed search content and online resource quality for ulnar collateral ligament injury and surgery.JSES international · 2024Article
- Evaluation of information from artificial intelligence on rotator cuff repair surgery.JSES international · 2024Article
- Article
- Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Obtain Information From Low-Quality Sources Online and Are Most Interested in Conservative Treatment and Expected Recovery.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Proximal Humerus Fracture: An Evaluation of the Readability and Value of Web-Based Knowledge.Cureus · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the quality and content of internet-based information available for some of the most common orthopaedic sports medicine terms.
methodsA search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines was performed. All English-language literature published from 2010 to 2020 discussing information quality pertaining to orthopaedic sports medicine terms was included. Outcomes included the search engines used, number and type of websites evaluated, platform, and quality scoring metrics. Descriptive statistics are presented.
resultsThis review includes 21 studies. Of these, 3 evaluated both the upper and lower extremity. Twelve focused on either the upper or lower extremity, most commonly rotator cuff tears (3 of 12) and/or anterior cruciate ligament pathologies (7 of 12). The most common engines were Google (18 of 21), Bing (16 of 21), Yahoo (16 of 21), YouTube (3 of 21), Ask (3 of 21), and AOL (2 of 21). The average number of media files assessed per study was 87 ± 55. Website quality was assessed with DISCERN (7 of 21), Flesch-Kincaid (9 of 21), Health on the Net (7 of 21), and/or
conclusionsThe results of this systematic review suggest that physicians should improve the quality of online information and encourage patients to access credible sources when conducting their own research. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Doctors can and should play an active role in closing the gap between the level of health literacy of their patients and that of most common online resources.
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.