ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2026
Development of a robust corpus for automated evaluation of online health information in Chinese using the DISCERN scale.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo develop the first comprehensive, standardized annotated corpus of Chinese online health information (OHI) using the full 16-item DISCERN instrument and to establish a reliable annotation process that supports automated quality assessment. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe assembled 510 web-sourced articles on breast cancer, arthritis, and depression. All the articles were independently annotated by three trained raters using the DISCERN scale. Annotation followed a four-step workflow: data collection and preprocessing, rater training, iterative annotation, and quality control. Raters calibrated through consensus sessions and calibration articles. The Dawid-Skene model aggregated individual annotations into final consensus scores. Original five-point ratings were retained and binarized (scores 1-3 as low quality, 4-5 as high quality) to enable both fine-grained and coarse evaluation for machine learning.
resultsInitial annotation of a 60-article pilot produced low agreement (mean Krippendorff's α ≈ 0.022) due to subjective variability. Successive calibration exercises improved agreement markedly, culminating in a corpus-wide Krippendorff's α of 0.834. Consensus scores correlated strongly with individual rater scores, confirming annotation robustness. The dual-scale design yielded a relatively balanced distribution of labels across topics, with roughly equal representation of low- and high-quality articles, and preserved granularity for detailed DISCERN analysis. DISCUSSION: Our iterative calibration approach and consensus modeling effectively addressed the subjective ambiguity inherent in quality assessment. The binary and five-class labeling strategies facilitate flexible downstream applications, allowing automated systems to perform both broad filtering and nuanced quality differentiation. The high inter-rater reliability demonstrates that rigorous training and consensus methods can overcome domain-specific annotation challenges.
conclusionThe resulting Chinese OHI corpus, annotated via a standardized DISCERN framework and refined through iterative calibration, provides a robust benchmark for training and evaluating machine learning models. This resource lays the foundation for scalable, reliable automated quality assessment of OHI in Chinese public health settings.
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.