Suppr超能文献

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。

A methodology to analyze the quality of health information on the internet: the example of diabetic neuropathy.

作者信息

Chumber Sundeep, Huber Jörg, Ghezzi Pietro

机构信息

Brighton & Sussex Medical School, Falmer, Brighton, UK (Mr Chumber, Dr Ghezzi)

University of Brighton, School of Health Sciences, Falmer, Brighton, UK (Dr Huber)

出版信息

Diabetes Educ. 2015 Feb;41(1):95-105. doi: 10.1177/0145721714560772. Epub 2014 Dec 5.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this work was to evaluate the criteria used to assess the quality of information on diabetic neuropathy on the Internet.

METHODS

Different search engines (Google, Yahoo, Bing, and Ask) and 1 governmental health website (MedlinePlus) were studied. The websites returned (200 for each search engine) were then classified according to their affiliation (eg, commercial, professional, patient groups). A scoring system was devised from the literature to assess quality of information. Websites were also analyzed using the 2 most widely used instruments for assessing the quality of health information, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) scoring system and the Health On the Net Foundation (HON) certification.

RESULTS

Professional websites or health portals scored better according to most criteria. Google and MedlinePlus returned results scoring significantly higher than other engines in some of the criteria. The use of different instruments gave different results and indicates that the JAMA score and the HON certification may not be sufficient ones.

CONCLUSIONS

This methodology could be used to evaluate the reliability and trustworthiness of information on the Internet on different topics to identify topic areas or websites where the available information is not appropriate.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估用于评估互联网上糖尿病神经病变信息质量的标准。

方法

研究了不同的搜索引擎(谷歌、雅虎、必应和Ask)以及1个政府健康网站(MedlinePlus)。然后,根据返回网站的所属机构(如商业、专业、患者群体)进行分类。从文献中设计了一个评分系统来评估信息质量。还使用了两种最广泛用于评估健康信息质量的工具对网站进行分析,即美国医学会(JAMA)评分系统和健康在线基金会(HON)认证。

结果

根据大多数标准,专业网站或健康门户网站得分更高。谷歌和MedlinePlus返回的结果在某些标准上得分明显高于其他引擎。使用不同的工具得出了不同的结果,这表明JAMA评分和HON认证可能并不充分。

结论

这种方法可用于评估互联网上不同主题信息的可靠性和可信度,以识别可用信息不合适的主题领域或网站。

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