Blizniuk Anastasiya, Furukawa Sayaka, Ueno Masayuki, Kawaguchi Yoko
Oral Health Prev Dent. 2016;14(4):363-9. doi: 10.3290/j.ohpd.a35746.
To evaluate the quality of patient-oriented online information about dental caries using existing consumer evaluation tools and to judge the efficacy of these tools in quality assessment.
The websites for the evaluation were pooled by using two general search engines (Google and Yahoo!). The search terms were: 'dental caries', 'tooth decay' and 'tooth cavity'. Three assessment tools (LIDA, DISCERN and FRES) were used to evaluate the quality of the information in the areas of accessibility, usability, reliability and readability.
In total, 77 websites were analysed. The median scores of LIDA accessibility and usability were 45.0 and 8.0, respectively, which corresponded to a medium level of quality. The median reliability scores for LIDA (12.0) and DISCERN (20.0) both corresponded to low level of quality. The readability was high with the median FRES score 59.7.
The websites on caries had good accessibility, usability and readability, while reliability of the information was poor. The LIDA instrument was found to be more convenient than DISCERN and can be recommended to lay people for quick quality assessment.
使用现有的消费者评估工具评估面向患者的龋齿在线信息的质量,并判断这些工具在质量评估中的有效性。
通过使用两个通用搜索引擎(谷歌和雅虎!)收集用于评估的网站。搜索词为:“龋齿”、“蛀牙”和“牙洞”。使用三种评估工具(LIDA、DISCERN和FRES)来评估信息在可及性、可用性、可靠性和可读性方面的质量。
总共分析了77个网站。LIDA可及性和可用性的中位数分数分别为45.0和8.0,这对应于中等质量水平。LIDA(12.0)和DISCERN(20.0)的可靠性中位数分数均对应低质量水平。可读性较高,FRES中位数分数为59.7。
龋齿相关网站具有良好的可及性、可用性和可读性,但信息的可靠性较差。发现LIDA工具比DISCERN更方便,可推荐给外行人进行快速质量评估。