ArticleChronic respiratory disease
Characterization and reliability of internet resources on pulmonary rehabilitation for individuals with chronic lung disease.
Article in Chronic respiratory disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Quality of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Information on the Chinese Internet: Website Evaluation Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Online resources as a source of information for exercise and physical activity in solid organ transplant recipients.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
- Readability and reliability of online patient education materials about statins.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndividuals with lung disease commonly use the internet as a source of health information on pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). The objective of this study was to characterize internet resources on PR, and to assess the content, readability, and quality of patient-directed PR resources.
methodsThe first 200 websites for the search term 'pulmonary rehabilitation resources and exercise' were analyzed on Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Website content was assessed based on 30 key components of PR from the 2013 and 2021 international consensus statements. Website quality was determined using DISCERN, JAMA benchmarks, and Global Quality Scale (GQS).
results66 unique PR websites were identified with the two most common categories being scientific resources (39%) and foundation/advocacy organizations (33%). The average reading level of websites was 11 ± 3. PR content varied significantly across websites (mean range 13.4-21.5). Median DISCERN total score and GQS score were 4 (IQR 3-4) and 3.5 (IQR 2-4), respectively, representing moderate-good quality. Foundation/advocacy websites had higher DISCERN and GQS scores compared to other websites.
conclusionFoundation/advocacy websites had the highest quality and reliability metrics; however, the higher-than-recommended reading levels may compromise patient comprehension and utilization. This study provides critical insight on the current state of online PR health-related information.
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.