• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

通过健康网站内容标准提高互联网上健康信息的透明度:一项比较研究。

Improving the transparency of health information found on the internet through the honcode: a comparative study.

作者信息

Laversin Sabine, Baujard Vincent, Gaudinat Arnaud, Simonet Maria-Ana, Boyer Célia

机构信息

Haute Autorité de Santé, France.

出版信息

Stud Health Technol Inform. 2011;169:654-8.

PMID:21893829
Abstract

This study aims to show that health websites not asking for HONcode certification (Control sample websites A) do not respect elementary ethical standards such as the HONcode. The HONcode quality and ethical standards and the certification process have been developed by the Health on the Net Foundation to improve the transparency of the health and medical information found on the Internet. We compared the compliance with the 8 HONcode principles, and respectively the respect of principles 1 (authority), 4 (assignment), 5 (justification) and 8 (honesty in advertising and editorial policy) by certified websites (A) and by health websites which have not requested the certification (B). The assessment of the HONcode compliance was performed by HON evaluators by the same standards for all type of sites. Results shows that 0.6% of health websites not asking for HONcode certification does respect the eight HONcode ethical standards vs. 89% of certified websites. Regarding the principles 1, 4, 5 and 8, 1.2% of B respect these principles vs. 92% for A. The certification process led health websites to respect the ethical and quality standards such as the HONcode, and disclosing the production process of the health website.

摘要

本研究旨在表明,未申请HONcode认证的健康网站(对照样本网站A)不遵守诸如HONcode等基本道德标准。HONcode质量与道德标准以及认证流程由健康在线基金会制定,以提高互联网上健康与医学信息的透明度。我们比较了认证网站(A)和未申请认证的健康网站(B)对8项HONcode原则的遵守情况,以及对原则1(权威性)、4(任务分配)、5(正当理由)和8(广告与编辑政策中的诚实性)的遵守情况。HON评估人员按照相同标准对所有类型的网站进行HONcode合规性评估。结果显示,未申请HONcode认证的健康网站中,0.6%确实遵守八项HONcode道德标准,而认证网站的这一比例为89%。关于原则1、4、5和8,B类网站中有1.2%遵守这些原则,而A类网站为92%。认证流程促使健康网站遵守诸如HONcode等道德和质量标准,并披露健康网站的制作过程。

相似文献

1
Improving the transparency of health information found on the internet through the honcode: a comparative study.通过健康网站内容标准提高互联网上健康信息的透明度:一项比较研究。
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2011;169:654-8.
2
Partial nephrectomy online: a preliminary evaluation of the quality of health information on the Internet.部分肾切除术在线:互联网健康信息质量的初步评估。
BJU Int. 2012 Dec;110(11 Pt B):E765-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11626.x. Epub 2012 Oct 26.
3
The Health On the Net Code of Conduct for medical and health Websites.医疗健康网站的网络健康行为准则。
Comput Biol Med. 1998 Sep;28(5):603-10. doi: 10.1016/s0010-4825(98)00037-7.
4
Evolution of health web certification through the HONcode experience.通过健康在线规范(HONcode)认证体系所体现的健康网站认证的发展历程。
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2011;169:53-7.
5
Automated Detection of HONcode Website Conformity Compared to Manual Detection: An Evaluation.与人工检测相比,HONcode网站合规性的自动检测:一项评估
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Jun 2;17(6):e135. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3831.
6
Machine learning approach for automatic quality criteria detection of health web pages.用于自动检测健康网页质量标准的机器学习方法。
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2007;129(Pt 1):705-9.
7
How to evaluate the quality of health related websites.如何评估与健康相关网站的质量。
Radiol Med. 2005 Mar;109(3):280-7.
8
[Certification of health-related websites in France].[法国健康相关网站认证]
Presse Med. 2009 Oct;38(10):1476-83. doi: 10.1016/j.lpm.2009.06.008. Epub 2009 Aug 7.
9
Concussion information online: evaluation of information quality, content and readability of concussion-related websites. concussion 相关网站的信息质量、内容和可读性评估。
Br J Sports Med. 2012 Jul;46(9):675-83. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2010.081620. Epub 2011 Apr 18.
10
Polycystic ovary syndrome: double click and right check. What do patients learn from the Internet about PCOS?多囊卵巢综合征:双击并进行右键检查。患者从互联网上了解到多囊卵巢综合征的哪些信息?
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012 Jul;163(1):43-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.03.028. Epub 2012 Apr 17.

引用本文的文献

1
Evaluating the quality of TikTok videos on coronary artery disease using various scales to examine correlations with video characteristics and high-quality content.使用各种量表评估TikTok上关于冠状动脉疾病的视频质量,以检验与视频特征和高质量内容的相关性。
Sci Rep. 2025 Mar 17;15(1):9189. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-93986-3.
2
Automated Credibility Assessment of Web-Based Health Information Considering Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode): Model Development and Validation Study.基于网络健康信息的自动化可信度评估:考虑网络健康基金会行为准则(HONcode)的模型开发与验证研究。
JMIR Form Res. 2023 Dec 22;7:e52995. doi: 10.2196/52995.
3
Quality of Web-Based Sickle Cell Disease Resources for Health Care Transition: Website Content Analysis.
用于医疗保健过渡的镰状细胞病网络资源质量:网站内容分析
JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2023 Dec 13;6:e48924. doi: 10.2196/48924.
4
IVC filter - assessing the readability and quality of patient information on the Internet.下腔静脉滤器 - 评估互联网上患者信息的可读性和质量。
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2024 Mar;12(2):101695. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2023.101695. Epub 2023 Oct 26.
5
An infodemiology study on exploring the quality and reliability of colorectal cancer immunotherapy information.一项关于探索结直肠癌免疫治疗信息质量和可靠性的信息流行病学研究。
Digit Health. 2023 Oct 4;9:20552076231205286. doi: 10.1177/20552076231205286. eCollection 2023 Jan-Dec.
6
Usefulness of YouTube in Sharing Information about New Gene Therapy for Spinal Muscular Atrophy: A Content Analysis.YouTube在分享脊髓性肌萎缩症新基因疗法信息方面的有用性:一项内容分析
Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Jan 3;11(1):147. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11010147.
7
Proximal Humerus Fracture: An Evaluation of the Readability and Value of Web-Based Knowledge.肱骨近端骨折:基于网络知识的可读性与价值评估
Cureus. 2022 Aug 13;14(8):e27957. doi: 10.7759/cureus.27957. eCollection 2022 Aug.
8
The use of Online Videos for Vitreoretinal Surgery Training: A Comprehensive Analysis.在线视频在玻璃体视网膜手术培训中的应用:综合分析
Beyoglu Eye J. 2022 Feb 18;7(1):9-17. doi: 10.14744/bej.2022.46338. eCollection 2022.
9
TikTok as an Information Hodgepodge: Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of Genitourinary Cancers Related Content.作为信息大杂烩的TikTok:泌尿生殖系统癌症相关内容的质量与可靠性评估
Front Oncol. 2022 Feb 15;12:789956. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.789956. eCollection 2022.
10
Factors Affecting Engagement in Web-Based Health Care Patient Information: Narrative Review of the Literature.影响患者参与网络医疗保健信息的因素:文献综述。
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Sep 23;23(9):e19896. doi: 10.2196/19896.