Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37910206›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2024

Otosclerosis online: a critical analysis of quality, reliability, readability and content of otosclerosis information.

Ambre La Rosa, Denis Ayache, Riham Altaisan, Mary Daval, Stéphane Gargula

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ambre La RosaDepartment of Otolaryngology, Hôpital Fondation Adolphe de Rothschild, 29 Rue Manin, 75019, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3704-9970
Denis AyacheDepartment of Otolaryngology, Hôpital Fondation Adolphe de Rothschild, 29 Rue Manin, 75019, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6809-7414
Riham AltaisanDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, CHU Besançon, Besançon Cedex, France.
Mary DavalDepartment of Otolaryngology, Hôpital Fondation Adolphe de Rothschild, 29 Rue Manin, 75019, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9815-1602
Stéphane GargulaDepartment of Otolaryngology, Hôpital Fondation Adolphe de Rothschild, 29 Rue Manin, 75019, Paris, France. stephane.gargula@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5034-4210

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSeveral therapeutic options are usually discussed for otosclerosis management. Patients seek medical advice from an ENT specialist but are also increasingly using the internet for medical issues. This study intends to assess readability and quality of websites with information on otosclerosis. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis is a cross-sectional study performed in a tertiary care centre. The results of the first two pages of a Google search with the keyword "otosclerosis" were reviewed by two independent investigators. Readability was assessed with the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and Gunning Fog Index. For quality and reliability assessment, the 16-item DISCERN instrument was used. Spearman's coefficient was used for correlations, and multivariate analyses of variance were used to assess differences. Inter-rater agreement was evaluated with concordance correlation coefficient.

results18 websites were included. Two websites (11.0%) were authored by academic institutions, 5/18 (28%) by government agencies, 6/18 (33%) by professional organisations and 5/18 (28%) were medical information websites. The mean DISCERN score of the 18 websites was 40.8 ± 6.7/80 (range 28.7-51.7), corresponding to "fair" quality. The mean FRES score was 43.27 ± 10.6, and the mean FKGL was 11.43 ± 2.30, corresponding to "difficult to read". The mean Gunning Fog index was 12.90 ± 2.19 (range 9.81-18.20), corresponding to a "college freshman" level.

conclusionsThis study shows that internet information on otosclerosis has an overall low readability, while the quality is heterogeneous and varies from "poor" to "good". Efforts should be made to improve the readability of otosclerosis websites.

Indexed as

OtosclerosisComprehensionCross-Sectional StudiesHumansInternetReadingReproducibility of ResultsComprehensionHealth literacyInternet useOtosclerosisReadabilityStapes surgery

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.