Published criteria for evaluating health related web sites: review

Kim, Paul; Eng, Thomas R.; Deering, Mary Jo; Maxfield, Andrew

doi:10.1136/bmj.318.7184.647

Cited by 434 publications

(385 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

368

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar approaches have been used for evaluating other healthrelated web sites. 24 Content abstraction included hospital accreditation and quality measures, defined as self-identified awards or markers of excellence, or measures for quality improvement. Some measures could be verified.…”

Section: Data Abstractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information superhighway or billboards by the roadside? An analysis of hospital web sites

Zingmond¹

2001

Western Journal of Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ⅷ Objectives To determine the prevalence of hospital web sites, the types of information provided within these sites, and the relationship of information to institutional characteristics. ⅷ Design Online search of hospital web sites over a 6-week period in late 1999. Web sites were abstracted for content. Bivariate comparisons were made of hospital profit status and ownership or operation by a multihospital network. ⅷ Participants California acute care hospitals and their web sites. ⅷ Main outcome measures Operation of web sites and web site content. ⅷ Results Among 390 California hospitals, 242 (62%) had easily identifiable web sites, 59 (15%) had no web sites, and 89 (23%) had sites identified only after telephone follow-up. Hospitals without sites were more likely not-for-profit, small, rural, or unaffiliated. The presentation of information was inconsistent, although most (93%) provided basic contact information. Many hospitals provided health content information (70%) or mentioned health classes (65%), but few guaranteed the quality of this information. Patient care features (online health profiles, risk identification, e-mail) were infrequent (13%) and rudimentary. Product advertising was frequent (54%) but was often nonhealth-related and unobtrusive. Of the 36% of hospitals that reported information on quality, few of the designated measures were valid and reliable measures of quality. Overall, 21% of hospitals reported accreditation (Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations) status, and for-profit hospital web sites were more likely to report this accreditation. ⅷ Conclusion Consumers should be aware of current limitations in using information on hospital web sites. In the future, hospitals may better realize the potential of web sites for the delivery of health care information and patient care.

show abstract

Section: Data Abstractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information superhighway or billboards by the roadside? An analysis of hospital web sites

Zingmond¹

2001

Western Journal of Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These are important principles to ensure quality and reliability of site content (15,17) . Technical scores revealed that disease prognosis was frequently not addressed in the studied sites (44.9%).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Internet websites about floaters and light flashes in patient education

Barbosa¹,

Martins²

2007

Arq. Bras. Oftalmol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Many organisations have published criteria to help individuals assess the quality of health-related websites but there is no standard set of guidelines. 4 Journals Reading journals is obviously one method of keeping track of the latest advances in your field of interest. There is a range of journals in both general dentistry and in the various specialties.…”

Section: Sources Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%