Quality and accuracy of online nutrition-related information: a systematic review of content analysis studies

Abstract

Objective: This systematic review aimed to summarise the level of quality and accuracy of nutrition-related information on websites and social media and determine if quality and accuracy varied between websites and social media or publishers of information. Design: This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021224277). CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health and Academic Search Complete were systematically searched on 15 January 2021 to identify content analysis studies, published in English after 1989, that evaluated the quality and/or accuracy of nutrition-related information published on websites or social media. A coding framework was used to classify studies’ findings about information quality and/or accuracy as poor, good, moderate, or varied. The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Quality Criteria Checklist was used to assess risk of bias. Setting: N/A Participants: N/A Results: From 10,482 articles retrieved, 64 were included. Most studies evaluated information from websites (n=53, 82.8%). Similar numbers of studies assessed quality (n=41, 64.1%) and accuracy (n=47, 73.4%). Almost half of the studies reported that quality (n=20, 48.8%) or accuracy (n = 23, 48.9%) was low. Quality and accuracy of information was similar on social media and websites, however, varied between information publishers. High risk of bias in sample selection and quality or accuracy evaluations was a common limitation. Conclusion: Online nutrition-related information is often inaccurate and of low-quality. Consumers seeking information online are at risk of being misinformed. More action is needed to improve the public’s eHealth and media literacy and the reliability of online nutrition-related information.

Prevalence and Correlates of Dietary and Nutrition Information Seeking Through Various Web-Based and Offline Media Sources Among Japanese Adults: Web-Based Cross-Sectional Study

“…Taken together with our findings on food literacy and diet quality, this study does suggest that dietary and nutrition information obtained from websites of government and medical manufacturers and books and magazines would be relatively high in quality and usefulness, whereas information obtained from television (and video sites) would be relatively low in quality and useless. This interpretation is generally consistent with previous studies on the quality of nutrition-related information [ 13 , 68 - 74 ]. Nevertheless, no empirical evidence on the quality of web-based or offline dietary and nutrition information written in Japanese is available, and such investigations are warranted [ 17 ].…”

“…If successful, newspapers may play a vital role in chronic disease prevention and management [ 12 ] among middle-aged and older individuals with a higher educational background [ 38 , 76 ]. Further, for every web-based media source, nutrition professionals are ultimately responsible for and able to contribute to the creation and promotion of evidence-based content on topics that are popular [ 16 , 17 , 93 ] among the public [ 13 , 94 ]. Simultaneously, consideration should be given to the practicality and utility of the information [ 6 ] as well as to the affective needs (eg, enjoyment) and cognitive needs (eg, interest) of information [ 15 ], all of which are essential to the effective dissemination of dietary and nutrition information.…”

Empowering Young Women: A Qualitative Co-Design Study of a Social Media Health Promotion Programme

“…Social media is often used as a health information source, which may lead to exacerbation of dietary quality concerns, as well as misleading perceptions regarding health and nutrition. The quality of nutrition information on websites and social media was evaluated in 2023 [ 9 ]. The comprehensive content analysis demonstrated the quality of information was “ low and often inaccurate ”, highlighting the risk of encountering misinformation.…”

#Fail: the quality and accuracy of nutrition-related information by influential Australian Instagram accounts

“… Quality: The reliability of information as assessed by quality criteria [ 26 ]. Quality criteria typically include components such as readability, inclusion of references, transparency about financial interests and disclosure of the author’s identity and qualifications a Nutrition-related information: information regarding healthy eating, dietary patterns, nutrients, nutritional requirements, nutritional composition of foods, nutritional supplements, health outcomes associated with foods and dietary patterns, food safety, food ethics, cooking and recipes intended for the general public [ 25 ]. a From Denniss et al [ 25 ] …”

“…Accurate and high-quality information is essential for effective health communication and promotion. In health communication literature, accuracy refers to health information’s factual correctness, and quality refers to information’s reliability when assessed using defined quality criteria (see Table 1 ) [ 25 , 26 ]. Quality and accuracy are two important but distinct components of information’s overall reliability.…”