Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39265162›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024

Quality Measurement of Consumer Health Questions: Content and Language Perspectives.

Ashwag Alasmari, Lina Zhou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

Ashwag AlasmariComputer Science Department, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-2486-5979
Lina ZhouDepartment of Business Information Systems and Operations Management, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6039-9664

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth information consumers increasingly rely on question-and-answer (Q&A) communities to address their health concerns. However, the quality of questions posted significantly impacts the likelihood and relevance of received answers.

objectiveThis study aims to improve our understanding of the quality of health questions within web-based Q&A communities.

methodsWe develop a novel framework for defining and measuring question quality within web-based health communities, incorporating content- and language-based variables. This framework leverages k-means clustering and establishes automated metrics to assess overall question quality. To validate our framework, we analyze questions related to kidney disease from expert-curated and community-based Q&A platforms. Expert evaluations confirm the validity of our quality construct, while regression analysis helps identify key variables.

resultsHigh-quality questions were more likely to include demographic and medical information than lower-quality questions (P<.001). In contrast, asking questions at the various stages of disease development was less likely to reflect high-quality questions (P<.001). Low-quality questions were generally shorter with lengthier sentences than high-quality questions (P<.01).

conclusionsOur findings empower consumers to formulate more effective health information questions, ultimately leading to better engagement and more valuable insights within web-based Q&A communities. Furthermore, our findings provide valuable insights for platform developers and moderators seeking to enhance the quality of user interactions and foster a more trustworthy and informative environment for health information exchange.

Indexed as

Consumer Health InformationHumansInternetLanguageSurveys and Questionnairesconsumerhealth informationhealth information consumershealth questionsinformation behaviorinformation needsinformation sharingqualityquality measurementquestion quality

Identifiers

PMID39265162
PMCPMC11427880

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.