ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2023
The quality of online information on Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease: can we do better?
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2023. 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Online Questions About Clubfoot Surgery: Content Analysis and Development of a Patient Education Resource.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAs patients increasingly utilize the Internet to obtain health-related information, the accuracy and usability of information prove critical, especially for patients and parents seeking care for relatively common orthopedic childhood disorders such as Legg-Calvé-Perthes (LCP) disease. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate available online health information regarding LCP disease. The study specifically seeks to (1) examine the accessibility, usability, reliability, and readability of online information, (2) compare the quality of sites from different sources, and (3) determine whether Health on the Net Foundation Code (HON-code) certification guarantees higher quality of information. MATERIALS AND
methodsWebsites from a query of both Google and Bing were compiled and scored using the Minervalidation tool (LIDA), an appraisal tool quantifying website quality, along with the Flesch-Kinkaid (FK) analysis, a metric assessing readability of content. All sites were organized based on source category [academic, private physician/physician group, governmental/non-profit organization (NPO), commercial, and unspecified] and HON-code certification.
resultsPhysician-based and governmental/NPO sites had the highest accessibility, the unspecified site group were the most reliable and usable, and the physician-based group was found to require the least education to comprehend. Unspecified sites had a significantly higher rating of reliability than physician sites (p = 0.0164) and academic sites (p < 0.0001). HON-code-certified sites were found to have greater scores across quality domains along with being easier to read compared to sites without certification, with significantly higher reliability scoring (p < 0.0001).
conclusionsAs a whole, information on the Internet regarding LCP disease is of poor quality. However, our findings also encourage patients to utilize HON-code-certified websites due to their significantly higher reliability. Future studies should analyze methods of improving this publicly available information. Additionally, future analyses should examine methods for patients to better identify reliable websites, as well as the best mediums for optimized patient access and comprehension.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37415047What 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.