Suppr超能文献

对法语多发性硬化症相关互联网网站的评估。

Evaluation of French-language internet sites dealing with multiple sclerosis.

作者信息

Guéguen Antoine, Maillart Elisabeth, Gallice Thibault, Allaf Bashar

机构信息

Service de Neurologie, Fondation Ophtalmologique A. de Rothschild, Paris, France.

Service de Neurologie, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris, France.

出版信息

Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin. 2016 Jun 15;2:2055217316652419. doi: 10.1177/2055217316652419. eCollection 2016 Jan-Dec.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Information available on the internet has changed patient-neurologist relationships. Its evaluation for multiple sclerosis is only partial, regardless of the language used.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to evaluate the content quality and ranking indexes of French-language sites dealing with multiple sclerosis.

METHODS

Two French terms and three search engines were used to identify the sites whose ranking indexes were calculated according to their positions on each page designated by the search engines. Three evaluators used the DISCERN questionnaire to assess the content quality of the 25 selected sites. The sites were classified according to the mean of the evaluators' grades. Grading agreement between evaluators was calculated. Ranking indexes were computed as a rank/100.

RESULTS

Content level was deemed mediocre, with poor referencing of the information provided. The naïve and two expert evaluators' grades differed. Content quality disparity was found within the different website categories, except for institutional sites. No correlation was found between content quality and ranking index.

CONCLUSION

The information available was heterogeneous. Physicians should guide patients in their internet searches for information so that they can benefit from good-quality input which is potentially able to improve their management.

摘要

背景

互联网上可得的信息改变了患者与神经科医生的关系。无论使用何种语言,对其在多发性硬化症方面的评估都只是部分性的。

目的

我们旨在评估法语多发性硬化症相关网站的内容质量和排名指标。

方法

使用两个法语词汇和三个搜索引擎来识别网站,其排名指标根据在搜索引擎指定的每个页面上的位置来计算。三名评估者使用DISCERN问卷来评估25个选定网站的内容质量。根据评估者评分的平均值对网站进行分类。计算评估者之间的评分一致性。排名指标计算为排名/100。

结果

内容水平被认为一般,所提供信息的参考文献质量较差。新手评估者和两名专家评估者的评分存在差异。除机构网站外,不同网站类别之间存在内容质量差异。未发现内容质量与排名指标之间存在相关性。

结论

可得的信息参差不齐。医生应指导患者进行互联网信息搜索,以便他们能够受益于可能改善其治疗管理的高质量信息。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b9b3/5433325/5718d39b5a88/10.1177_2055217316652419-fig1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验