ArticleStrategies in trauma and limb reconstruction
Osseointegration in Limb Replacement Surgery: A Quality and Readability Analysis of Information on the Internet.
Article in Strategies in trauma and limb reconstruction. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Osseointegrated limb surgery for amputees is becoming increasingly common due to its advantages over traditional socket prostheses. Institutions worldwide are developing services to offer this option to suitable patients and are promoting these services online. This study aims to assess the quality and readability of the online information provided. Methods: The three most popular search engines using the English language were searched, and the first 40 websites from each search were included. All included websites were assessed for reading using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) (equivalent to the United States reading grade level), the Gunning Fog Index (G-Fog) and the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE). A quality assessment was conducted using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria and the Health on the Net Certificate (HONC). Results: The initial search yielded 9,985,000 websites, of which the top 120 were assessed. Of the 23 websites in the final analysis, none had a reading grade level of sixth grade or lower. The lowest FKGL reading grade was 9.7/18, with a mean of 11.3/18 (95% CI 10.72-11.93), which corresponds with the reading level of a high school junior. The mean FRE was 38.83/100 (95% CI 36.16-41.49). The mean G-Fog score was 12.57/20 (95% CI 11.71-13.42) (representing reading levels of a college freshman). None of the 23 websites had HON certification. The mean JAMA score was 1.76 out of 4 (95% CI 1.34-2.18), meaning the information was of low to moderate quality. The mean Hospital for Special Surgery Osseointegration Information Score was 5.70 out of 16 (95% CI 4.33-7.06), indicating low quality. Discussion: A significant amount of online information is available about osseointegrated limb replacement surgery (OLRS). However, much of this content is written at a level that many patients may find difficult to understand, limiting usefulness. Additionally, the overall quality of the available information is generally low. Improving both the readability and quality of this information is essential to ensure patients have access to accurate and accessible details. How to cite this article: Stanley C, Sheridan GA, Page BJ,
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.