ArticleJournal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures)2024
User's Search for Information: A Multi-Language Cross-Sectional Assessment of Websites about Healthcare-Associated Infections.
Article in Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Healthcare-associated infections have a significant impact on public health, and many patients and their next-of-kin are seeking information on the internet. The study aimed to assess the quality of online written content about healthcare-associated infections available in English, Romanian, and Hungarian languages. Materials and methods: The study sample included 75 websites, 25 for each language subgroup. The assessment involved examining the general characteristics, adherence to established credibility criteria, and the completeness and accuracy of informational content. The evaluation was conducted using a topic-specific, evidence-based benchmark. Two evaluators independently graded completeness and accuracy; scores were recorded on a scale from 0 to 10. A comparative analysis of websites was performed, considering pertinent characteristics, and potential factors influencing information quality were subjected to testing. The statistical significance was set at 0.05. Results: For the overall study sample, the average credibility, completeness, and accuracy scores were 5.1 (SD 1.7), 2.4 (SD 1.5), and 5.9 (SD 1.0), respectively. Pairwise comparison tests revealed that English websites rated significantly higher than Romanian and Hungarian websites on all three quality measures (P<0.05). Website specialization, ownership, and main goal were not associated with credibility or content ratings. However, conventional medicine websites consistently scored higher than alternative medicine and other websites across all three information quality measures (P<0.05). Credibility scores were positively but weakly correlated with completeness (rho=0.273; P=0.0176) and accuracy scores (rho=0.365; P=0.0016). Conclusions: The overall quality ratings of information about healthcare-associated infections on English, Romanian, and Hungarian websites ranged from intermediate to low. The description of information regarding the symptoms and prevention of healthcare-associated infections was notably unsatisfactory. The study identified website characteristics possibly associated with higher-quality online sources about healthcare-associated infections, but additional research is needed to establish robust evidence.
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.