ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of information regarding the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 available to the general public from all countries.DesignSystematic analysis using the ‘Ensuring Quality Information for Patients’ (EQIP) Tool (score 0–36), Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark (score 0–4) and the DISCERN Tool (score 16–80) to analyse websites containing information targeted at the general public.Data sourcesTwelve popular search terms, including ‘Coronavirus’, ‘COVID-19 19’, ‘Wuhan virus’, ‘How to treat coronavirus’ and ‘COVID-19 19 Prevention’ were identified by ‘Google AdWords’ and ‘Google Trends’. Unique links from the first 10 pages for each search term were identified and evaluated on its quality of information.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesAll websites written in the English language, and provides information on prevention or treatment of COVID-19 intended for the general public were considered eligible. Any websites intended for professionals, or specific isolated populations, such as students from one particular school, were excluded, as well as websites with only video content, marketing content, daily caseload update or news dashboard pages with no health information.ResultsOf the 1275 identified websites, 321 (25%) were eligible for analysis. The overall EQIP, JAMA and DISCERN scores were 17.8, 2.7 and 38.0, respectively. Websites originated from 34 countries, with the majority from the USA (55%). News Services (50%) and Government/Health Departments (27%) were the most common sources of information and their information quality varied significantly. Majority of websites discuss prevention alone despite popular search trends of COVID-19 treatment. Websites discussing both prevention and treatment (n=73, 23%) score significantly higher across all tools (p<0.001).ConclusionThis comprehensive assessment of online COVID-19 information using EQIP, JAMA and DISCERN Tools indicate that most websites were inadequate. This necessitates improvements in online resources to facilitate public health measures during the pandemic.

Background Appendicitis is a common surgical problem among the young adult population, who are likely to use the internet to obtain medical information. This information may determine the health-seeking behavior of an individual and may delay medical attention. Little is known regarding the quality of patient information on appendicitis on the internet, as this has not been previously studied. Objective The aim of our study was to identify the quality of information regarding appendicitis on websites intended for the public. Methods We conducted a systematic review of information on appendicitis available online using the following 4 search terms in google: “appendicitis,” “appendix,” “appendectomy,” and “appendicectomy”. The top 100 websites of each search term were assessed using the validated Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) tool (score 0-36). Results A total of 119 websites met the eligibility criteria for evaluation. The overall median EQIP score for all websites was 20 (IQR 18-22). More than half the websites originated from the USA (65/119, 54.6%), and 45.4% (54/119) of all websites originated from hospitals, although 43% (23/54) of these did not mention qualitative risks from surgery. Incidence rates were only provided for complications and mortality in 12.6% (15/119) and 3.3% (4/119) of all websites, respectively. Conclusions The assessment of the quality and readability of websites concerning appendicitis by the EQIP tool indicates that most sites online were of poor credibility, with minimal information regarding complication rates and mortality. To improve education and awareness of appendicitis, there is an immediate need for more informative and patient-centered websites that are more compatible with international quality standards.

No abstract

BACKGROUND Appendicitis is a common surgical problem amongst the young adult population, who are likely to use the Internet to obtain medical information. This information may determine the health-seeking behaviour of an individual and may delay medical attention. Little is known regarding the quality of patient information on appendicitis on the Internet as this has not been previously studied. OBJECTIVE Our objective for this study was to evaluate the quality the quality of information found on the top searched websites that aim to provide patient information regarding appendicitis. METHODS We conducted a systematic review of information on appendicitis available online using 4 search terms in google ‘appendicitis’ ‘appendix’, ‘appendectomy’ and ‘appendicectomy’. The top 100 websites of every search term were assessed using the validated ’Ensuring Quality Information for Patients’ (EQIP) tool (Score 0-36). RESULTS A total of 119 websites met the eligibility criteria for evaluation. The overall median EQIP score for all websites was 20 (Interquartile range 18-22). More than half the websites originated from the USA (53%). 45% of all websites originated from hospitals, though 43% of these did not mention qualitative risks from surgery. Incidence rates were only provided for complications and mortality in 13% and 3% of all websites respectively. CONCLUSIONS The assessment of the quality and readability of websites concerning appendicitis by the EQIP tool indicates that most sites online were of poor credibility, with minimal information regarding complication rates and mortality. To improve education and awareness of appendicitis, there is an immediate need for more informative and patient-centred websites that are more compatible with international quality standards.

Background As surgical education has evolved, most curricula have favoured a competency-based approach over traditional apprenticeship models. Surgical simulation can be a useful aide in the training of both oncological and reconstructive breast surgery trainees. This review investigates the extent to which simulation of breast surgery procedures has been validated as a training tool. Methods A comprehensive literature search for studies evaluating the objective validity of breast surgery simulators was performed, using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases. Studies assessing construct, concurrent or predictive validity were included, as well as those demonstrating skill acquisition. Findings The initial literature search returned 1,625 hits, with only five articles meeting the inclusion criteria. Simulators were designed to train procedures such as breast augmentation, lesion biopsy and excision. Of these, breast biopsy was the most simulated procedure (three studies). Two studies evaluated animal models, two evaluated synthetic models and one study assessed both a synthetic and animal model. Construct validity was confirmed in two studies, concurrent validity in one study and a learning curve demonstrated in another study. No association between experience and performance was seen in the remaining study. The quality of the evidence presented in each article was low due to numerous limitations. Despite the abundance of breast surgery simulators created for trainees, few have been objectively validated and they only cover a narrow range of breast procedures. Although early results are promising, further studies are required before routine use of simulators is considered in breast surgery curricula.