Evaluation of the Quality of Otolaryngology Information on Persian Websites

Document Type : Original

Authors

Otolaryngology Research Ccenter, Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Amir-Al’am Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Introduction:
More and more patients are using the Internet to achieve information these days. Most patients (85%) use search engines to look for information about health. The quality of this information that patients encounter is highly different. This study aimed to assess the quality of information that an ear, nose, and throat patient would encounter when searching for information about their problem.
 
Materials and Methods:
The Persian keywords of most common otolaryngology problems were searched in Google. Moreover, the first 10 websites were selected by each search for the analysis using the DISCERN instrument. This instrument is made to evaluate the comprehensiveness and quality of health-related websites.
 
Results:
A total of 100 websites were evaluated in this study. However, 12 (12%) websites were excluded from further analysis due to copyright problems, advertisements, traditional treatments, and other reasons. The total DISCERN score for all 88 evaluated websites was obtained at 1.89 (SD=0.49). Moreover, the highest and lowest scores were 3.66 and 1.21, respectively. The search for “otitis treatment” had the highest results (mean DISCERN score=2.20, SD=0.38). The statistical analysis showed that the mean score for the Wikipedia.com Persian website was significantly higher, compared to the other Persian websites (P< 0.001).
 
Conclusion:
Persian websites have information with variable quality for the treatment of otolaryngology problems. Repeated websites, such as Wikipedia.com provided better information; however, the total quality of information was not satisfying.
 

Keywords

References

  1. McMullan M. Patients using the Internet to obtain health information: how this affects the patient-health professional relationship. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;63(1-2):24-8.
  2. Rothschild MA. Otolaryngology and the Internet. E-mail and the World Wide Web. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1998;31(2):255-76.
  3. Samadbeik M, Ahmadi M, Mohammadi A, Mohseni Saravi B. Health Information on Internet: Quality, Importance, and Popularity of Persian Health Websites. Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal. 2014;16(4).
  4. Jadad AR, Gagliardi A. Rating health information on the Internet: navigating to knowledge or to Babel? JAMA. 1998;279(8):611-4.
  5. Ybarra ML, Suman M. Help seeking behavior and the Internet: a national survey. Int J Med Inform. 2006;75(1):29-41.
  6. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa ER. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA. 2002;287(20): 2691-700.
  7. Barker S, Charlton NP, Holstege CP. Accuracy of internet recommendations for prehospital care of venomous snake bites. Wilderness Environ Med. 2010;21(4):298-302.
  8. Internet World Stats. Top 20 countries with the highest number of internet users 2017, Dec 31, [Cited 2018, Apr 2]. Available from: http://www. internetworldstas.com/stats5.htm.
  9. Rezailashkajani M, Roshandel D, Ansari S, Zali MR. A web-based patient education system and self-help group in Persian language for inflammatory bowel disease patients. Int J Med Inform. 2008;77(2):122-8.
  10. Chang MY, Han DH, Moon IJ, Kim ST, Kim DY, Lee CH, et al. Assessment of allergic rhinitis websites in Korea. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol. 2010;3(1):32-6.
  11. Silva LVER, de Mello JF, Mion O. Evaluation of Brazilian web site information on allergic rhinitis. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2005; 71(5):590-7.
  12. Harland J, Bath P. Assessing the quality of websites providing information on multiple sclerosis: evaluating tools and comparing sites. Health informatics journal. 2007;13(3):207-21.
  13. Banasiak NC, Meadows-Oliver M. Evaluating asthma websites using the Brief DISCERN instrument. J Asthma Allergy. 2017;10:191-6.
  14. O'Connell Ferster AP, Hu A. Evaluating the quality and readability of Internet information sources regarding the treatment of swallowing disorders. Ear Nose Throat J. 2017;96(3):128-38.
  15. Shahrzadi L, Mojiri S, Janatian S, Taheri B, Ashrafi-rizi H, Shahrzadi Z, et al. Quality Assessment of Persian Mental Disorders Websites Using the Webmedqual Scale. Acta Informatica Medica. 2014;22(3):183-8.
  16. Zahedi R, Taheri B, Shahrzadi L, Tazhibi M, Ashrafi-rizi H. Quality of persian addiction websites: a survey based on silberg, discern and wqet instruments (2011). Acta Informatica Medica. 2013; 21(1):46-50.
  17. Samadbeik M, Ahmadi M, Mohammadi A, Mohseni Saravi B. Health information on internet: quality, importance, and popularity of persian health websites. Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal. 2014; 16(4):e12866.
  18. Sullivan D. Google Still World’s Most Popular Search Engine By Far, But Share Of Unique Searchers Dips Slightly 2013, Feb 11, [cited: 2017, Mar 17]. Available from: https://searchengineland. com/ google-worlds-most-popular-search-engine-148089.
  19. Diaz JA, Griffith RA, Ng JJ, Reinert SE, Friedmann PD, Moulton AW. Patients' use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med. 2002; 17(3):180-5.
  20. Fox S. Online health search 2006. Pew Internet and American Life Project 2006 Oct 29. [cited: 2017 Mar 17]. available from: http://www. pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2006/PIP_Online_Health_2006.pdf.pdf. Accessed January 6, 2012.

 

 

 

Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
Volume 32, Issue 4
July and August 2020
Pages 237-241

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics