Robins Stephanie, Barr Helena J, Idelson Rachel, Lambert Sylvie, Zelkowitz Phyllis
Jewish General Hospital, Department of Psychiatry, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Interact J Med Res. 2016 Oct 21;5(4):e25. doi: 10.2196/ijmr.6440.
Many men lack knowledge about male infertility, and this may have consequences for their reproductive and general health. Men may prefer to seek health information online, but these sources of information vary in quality.
The objective of this study is to determine if online sources of information regarding male infertility are readable, suitable, and of appropriate quality for Internet users in the general population.
This study used a cross-sectional design to evaluate online sources resulting from search engine queries. The following categories of websites were considered: (1) Canadian fertility clinics, (2) North American organizations related to fertility, and (3) the first 20 results of Google searches using the terms "male infertility" and "male fertility preservation" set to the search locations worldwide, English Canada, and French Canada. Websites that met inclusion criteria (N=85) were assessed using readability indices, the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM), and the DISCERN tool. The associations between website affiliation (government, university/medical, non-profit organization, commercial/corporate, private practice) and Google placement to readability, suitability, and quality were also examined.
None of the sampled websites met recommended levels of readability. Across all websites, the mean SAM score for suitability was 45.37% (SD 11.21), or "adequate", while the DISCERN mean score for quality was 43.19 (SD 10.46) or "fair". Websites that placed higher in Google obtained a higher overall score for quality with an r (58) value of -.328 and a P value of .012, but this position was not related to readability or suitability. In addition, 20% of fertility clinic websites did not include fertility information for men.
There is a lack of high quality online sources of information on male fertility. Many websites target their information to women, or fail to meet established readability criteria for the general population. Since men may prefer to seek health information online, it is important that health care professionals develop high quality sources of information on male fertility for the general population.
许多男性对男性不育缺乏了解,这可能会对他们的生殖健康和整体健康产生影响。男性可能更倾向于在网上寻求健康信息,但这些信息来源的质量参差不齐。
本研究的目的是确定关于男性不育的在线信息来源对于普通人群中的互联网用户而言是否具有可读性、适用性和适当的质量。
本研究采用横断面设计来评估搜索引擎查询结果中的在线信息来源。考虑了以下几类网站:(1)加拿大生育诊所;(2)北美与生育相关的组织;(3)使用“男性不育”和“男性生育力保存”这两个术语在全球、加拿大英语区和加拿大法语区进行搜索后,谷歌搜索的前20个结果。使用可读性指数、材料适用性评估(SAM)和辨别工具对符合纳入标准的网站(N = 85)进行评估。还研究了网站所属类型(政府、大学/医学、非营利组织、商业/企业、私人诊所)与谷歌排名对可读性、适用性和质量的关联。
所有抽样网站均未达到推荐的可读性水平。在所有网站中,适用性的平均SAM得分为45.37%(标准差11.21),即“足够”,而质量的辨别平均得分为43.19(标准差10.46),即“一般”。在谷歌中排名较高的网站在质量方面获得了更高的总体得分,r(58)值为-.328,P值为.012,但该排名与可读性或适用性无关。此外,20%的生育诊所网站未包含男性生育信息。
缺乏关于男性生育的高质量在线信息来源。许多网站将信息目标受众设定为女性,或者未达到针对普通人群既定的可读性标准。由于男性可能更倾向于在网上寻求健康信息,医疗保健专业人员为普通人群开发高质量的男性生育信息来源非常重要。