• 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

互联网上三种常见耳鼻喉科手术相关信息的质量。

The quality of information on three common ENT procedures on the Internet.

机构信息

Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Beaumont Hospital, Beaumont Road, Dublin 9, Ireland.

出版信息

Ir J Med Sci. 2012 Jun;181(2):221-4. doi: 10.1007/s11845-011-0787-0. Epub 2011 Dec 27.

DOI:10.1007/s11845-011-0787-0
PMID:22200968
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Internet hosts a large number of high-quality medical resources and poses seemingly endless opportunities to inform, teach, and connect professionals and patients alike. However, it is difficult for the lay person to distinguish accurate from inaccurate information.

AIM

This study was undertaken in an attempt to assess the quality of information on otolaryngology available on the Internet.

METHODS

Sixty appropriate websites, using search engines Yahoo and Google, were evaluated for completeness and accuracy using three commonly performed ENT operations: tonsillectomy (T), septoplasty (S), and myringoplasty (M).

RESULTS

A total of 60 websites were evaluated (NT = 20, NM = 20, NS = 20). A total of 86.7% targeted lay population and 13.3% targeted the medical professionals. 35% of the sites included all critical information that patients should know prior to undergoing surgery and over 94% of these were found to contain no inaccuracies. Negative bias towards medical profession was detected in 3% of websites.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current climate, with informed consent being of profound importance, the Internet represents a useful tool for both patients and surgeons.

摘要

背景

互联网上有大量高质量的医学资源,为专业人士和患者提供了无穷无尽的信息、教学和交流机会。然而,对于非专业人士来说,很难区分准确和不准确的信息。

目的

本研究旨在评估互联网上耳鼻喉科信息的质量。

方法

使用搜索引擎雅虎和谷歌,评估了 60 个合适的网站,针对扁桃体切除术(T)、鼻中隔成形术(S)和鼓室成形术(M)这三种常见的耳鼻喉科手术,评估了其完整性和准确性。

结果

共评估了 60 个网站(NT=20,NM=20,NS=20)。其中 86.7%的网站针对的是普通人群,13.3%的网站针对的是医疗专业人员。35%的网站包含了患者在接受手术前应该知道的所有关键信息,而且这些信息中超过 94%的内容都是准确的。在 3%的网站中发现了对医疗行业的负面偏见。

结论

在当前的环境下,知情同意至关重要,互联网对于患者和外科医生来说都是一个有用的工具。

相似文献

1
The quality of information on three common ENT procedures on the Internet.互联网上三种常见耳鼻喉科手术相关信息的质量。
Ir J Med Sci. 2012 Jun;181(2):221-4. doi: 10.1007/s11845-011-0787-0. Epub 2011 Dec 27.
2
Quality of information on the Internet-has a decade made a difference?互联网上信息的质量——十年时间有改变吗?
Ir J Med Sci. 2018 Nov;187(4):873-876. doi: 10.1007/s11845-018-1790-5. Epub 2018 Mar 28.
3
Accuracy of Internet guidance on pediatric otolaryngology procedures.互联网上儿科耳鼻喉科手术指导的准确性。
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2014 Dec;78(12):2190-2. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2014.10.009. Epub 2014 Oct 18.
4
Quality of Internet information in pediatric otolaryngology: a comparison of three most referenced websites.儿科耳鼻喉科互联网信息的质量:三个引用率最高的网站的比较
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2012 Sep;76(9):1312-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2012.05.026. Epub 2012 Jul 7.
5
Quality of Patient Information on Lipofilling in the Internet.互联网中关于脂肪填充的患者信息质量。
Dermatol Surg. 2021 Mar 1;47(3):e86-e90. doi: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000002752.
6
Assessment of the quality of web-based information on bunions.足囊炎相关网络信息质量评估。
Foot Ankle Int. 2013 Aug;34(8):1134-9. doi: 10.1177/1071100713481458. Epub 2013 Mar 11.
7
A methodology to analyze the quality of health information on the internet: the example of diabetic neuropathy.一种分析互联网上健康信息质量的方法:以糖尿病神经病变为例。
Diabetes Educ. 2015 Feb;41(1):95-105. doi: 10.1177/0145721714560772. Epub 2014 Dec 5.
8
The variation in quality and content of patient-focused health information on the Internet for otitis media.互联网上针对中耳炎的以患者为中心的健康信息在质量和内容上的差异。
Child Care Health Dev. 2018 Mar;44(2):221-226. doi: 10.1111/cch.12524. Epub 2017 Sep 14.
9
Assessment of the quality of patient-orientated internet information on surgery for ulcerative colitis.溃疡性结肠炎手术患者导向型互联网信息质量评估
Colorectal Dis. 2015 Jun;17(6):511-4. doi: 10.1111/codi.12870.
10
Evaluating the quality of internet information for breast cancer.评估乳腺癌互联网信息的质量。
Breast. 2016 Feb;25:34-7. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2015.10.001. Epub 2015 Nov 5.

引用本文的文献

1
The quality and readability of patient information provided by ChatGPT: can AI reliably explain common ENT operations?ChatGPT 提供的患者信息的质量和可读性:人工智能能可靠地解释常见的耳鼻喉科手术吗?
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2024 Nov;281(11):6147-6153. doi: 10.1007/s00405-024-08598-w. Epub 2024 Mar 26.
2
Internet search analytics for shoulder arthroplasty: what questions are patients asking?肩关节置换术的互联网搜索分析:患者都在问哪些问题?
Clin Shoulder Elb. 2023 Mar;26(1):55-63. doi: 10.5397/cise.2022.01347. Epub 2023 Feb 23.
3
Quality of information on the Internet-has a decade made a difference?

本文引用的文献

1
Pediatric surgery on the Internet: is the truth out there?互联网上的小儿外科手术:真相何在?
J Pediatr Surg. 2000 Aug;35(8):1179-82. doi: 10.1053/jpsu.2000.8723.
2
Published criteria for evaluating health related web sites: review.已发布的评估健康相关网站的标准:综述。
BMJ. 1999 Mar 6;318(7184):647-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7184.647.
3
Computer-based patient education.基于计算机的患者教育。
互联网上信息的质量——十年时间有改变吗?
Ir J Med Sci. 2018 Nov;187(4):873-876. doi: 10.1007/s11845-018-1790-5. Epub 2018 Mar 28.
4
Characterizing the Processes for Navigating Internet Health Information Using Real-Time Observations: A Mixed-Methods Approach.利用实时观测来描述浏览互联网健康信息的过程:一种混合方法。
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Jul 20;17(7):e173. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3945.
Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1998 Apr;31(2):309-17. doi: 10.1016/s0030-6665(05)70050-5.
4
Otolaryngology and the Internet. E-mail and the World Wide Web.耳鼻喉科学与互联网。电子邮件与万维网。
Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1998 Apr;31(2):255-76. doi: 10.1016/s0030-6665(05)70046-3.
5
Rating health information on the Internet: navigating to knowledge or to Babel?评估互联网上的健康信息:是通向知识还是走向巴别塔?
JAMA. 1998 Feb 25;279(8):611-4. doi: 10.1001/jama.279.8.611.
6
Digital dialogue. Sharing information and interests on the Internet.数字对话。在互联网上分享信息和兴趣。
JAMA. 1997 Apr 16;277(15):1258-60. doi: 10.1001/jama.277.15.1258.
7
Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor--Let the reader and viewer beware.评估、控制并确保互联网上医学信息的质量:读者与观者需谨慎——让读者和观者小心。
JAMA. 1997 Apr 16;277(15):1244-5.