McKearney R M, MacKinnon R C, Smith M, Baker R
School of Psychological Sciences,University of Manchester,UK.
Audiology Department,Addenbrooke's Hospital,Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust,UK.
J Laryngol Otol. 2018 Nov;132(11):984-989. doi: 10.1017/S0022215118001792. Epub 2018 Oct 24.
To assess, using standardised tools, the quality and readability of online tinnitus information that patients are likely to access.
A standardised review was conducted of websites relating to tinnitus and its management. Each website was scored using the DISCERN instrument and the Flesch Reading Ease scale.
Twenty-seven unique websites were evaluated. The mean DISCERN score of the websites was 34.5 out of 80 (standard deviation = 11.2). This would be considered 'fair' in quality. Variability in DISCERN score between websites was high (range, 15-57: 'poor' to 'very good'). Website readability was poor, with a mean Flesch Reading Ease score of 52.6 (standard deviation = 7.7); this would be considered 'difficult' to read.
In general, the quality of tinnitus websites is fair and the readability is poor, with substantial variability in quality between websites. The Action on Hearing Loss and the British Tinnitus Association websites were identified as providing the highest quality information.
使用标准化工具评估患者可能访问的在线耳鸣信息的质量和可读性。
对与耳鸣及其管理相关的网站进行标准化审查。每个网站使用DISCERN工具和弗莱什易读性量表进行评分。
评估了27个独特的网站。这些网站的DISCERN平均得分为80分中的34.5分（标准差 = 11.2）。这在质量上会被认为是“一般”。网站之间DISCERN得分的差异很大（范围为15 - 57：“差”到“非常好”）。网站可读性较差，弗莱什易读性平均得分为52.6（标准差 = 7.7）；这会被认为“难以”阅读。
总体而言，耳鸣网站的质量一般，可读性较差，网站之间的质量存在很大差异。英国听力损失行动组织和英国耳鸣协会的网站被认为提供了最高质量的信息。
