ReviewInternational journal of nursing sciences2025
Evaluation of the measurement properties of online health information quality assessment tools: A systematic review.
Review in International journal of nursing sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality, understandability, and actionability of Arabic web-based content on periodontal and related oral surgical procedures: a cross-sectional infodemiological study.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- Production of a Health Awareness Video on Precautionary Measures Against Respiratory Infectious Diseases for Public Transportation Drivers: Protocol for a Scoping Review, a Delphi Study, and a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Validation of the Simplified Chinese Clear Communication Index Using Diabetes Education Materials: Instrument Adaptation and Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Mapping research trends and competency domains in nursing-related digital and artificial intelligence technologies: A bibliometric analysis.International journal of nursing sciences · 2026Review
- Article
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
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the measurement properties and methodological quality of instruments developed to evaluate the quality of online health information. Methods: In this study, a systematic search was conducted across a range of databases, including the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, China Science and Technology Journal (VIP), SinoMed, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Embase, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and Scopus. The search period spanned from the inception of the databases to October 2023. Two researchers independently conducted the literature screening and data extraction. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist. The measurement properties were evaluated using the COSMIN criteria. The modified Grading, Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to determine the quality grade. Results: A total of 18 studies were included, and the measurement properties of 17 scales were assessed. Fifteen scales had content validity, three had structural validity, six had internal consistency, two had test-retest reliability, nine had interrater reliability, one had measurement error, six instruments had criterion validity, and three scales had hypotheses testing for construct validity; however, the evaluation of their methodological quality and measurement properties revealed deficiencies. Of these 17 scales, 15 were assigned a Level B recommendation, and two received a Level C recommendation. Conclusions: The Health Information Website Evaluation Tool (HIWET) can be temporarily used to evaluate the quality of health information on websites. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) can temporarily assess the quality of video-based health information. However, the effectiveness of both tools needs to be further verified.
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.