Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36120225›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

Proximal Humerus Fracture: An Evaluation of the Readability and Value of Web-Based Knowledge.

Mohamed Elshohna, Yasir Hidayat, Ahmed Karkuri

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mohamed ElshohnaOrthopaedics and Traumatology, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick, IRL.
Yasir HidayatOrthopaedics and Trauma, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick , IRL.
Ahmed KarkuriOrthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick, IRL.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background In today's scientifically developed world, the majority of patients use different websites to explore sophisticated and varied health knowledge. Consequently, healthcare specialists remain concerned that patients may be betrayed. Currently, there is a scarcity of information on the importance and legibility of online health data on proximal humerus fractures. This study aimed to assess the readability and value of existing web-based evidence regarding fractures of the proximal humerus. Methodology A search of three keywords, namely, broken shoulder, proximal humerus fracture, and broken humerus, was performed using the top three internet search engines. The first five pages of every search browser were analyzed. After discarding duplicate websites, 80 websites were found to be suitable for the analysis. Website quality was scored using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria and the DISCERN criteria. The presence or absence of the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HON code) certification and author characteristics were noted. The degree of readability was measured using six unique parameters, namely, the Automated Readability Index, Flesch Reading Ease Score, SMOG Index, Coleman-Liau index, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and Gunning-Fog Index. Results In total, 80 specific websites were fit for evaluation and analysis. On the DISCERN tool, six (7.5%) websites revealed a high score. Only 20 websites fulfilled all four JAMA benchmark criteria. Of the total 80, only 17 were HON code-certified websites. Readability was variable but the majority was at the college level. Conclusions The most important result of this study is the low value, readability, and clarity of online testimony regarding proximal humerus fractures.

Indexed as

fracturehumerusirelandshoulderwebsites

Identifiers

PMID36120225
PMCPMC9465624

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.