Department of Ophthalmology, Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, United States of America.
Mid Atlantic Retina, Wills Eye Hospital, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.
Semin Ophthalmol. 2021 Aug 18;36(5-6):400-405. doi: 10.1080/08820538.2021.1893761. Epub 2021 Mar 1.
One of the top ten causes of disability in the United States is vision loss, primarily due to age-related eye diseases such as age-related macular degeneration. With an aging population, the number of people affected by this condition is expected to rise. Patients increasingly turn to the internet for health-related information, but no standard exists across published websites.
To assess the quality, content, accountability and readability of information found online for age-related macular degeneration.
This cross-sectional study analyzed 12 freely available medical sites with information on age-related macular degeneration and used PubMed as a gold standard for comparison. Thirty-four questions were composed to include information most relevant to patients and each website was independently evaluated by one vitreoretinal surgeon, two vitreoretinal fellows and one ophthalmology resident. Readability was analyzed using an online readability tool. The JAMA benchmarks were used to evaluate the accountability of each site.
Freely available online information was used in this study.
The average questionnaire score for all websites was 90.23 (SD 17.56, CI 95% ±9.55) out of 136 possible points. There was a significant difference between the content quality of the websites ( = .01). The mean reading grade for all websites was 11.44 (SD 1.75, CI 95% ±0.99). No significant correlation was found between content accuracy and the mean reading grade or Google rank (r = 0.392, = .207 and r = 0.133, = .732, respectively). Without including PubMed, only one website achieved the full 4 JAMA benchmarks. There was no correlation between the accuracy of the content of the website and JAMA benchmarks (r = 0.344, = .273). The interobserver reproducibility was similar among 3 out of 4 observers (r = 0.747 between JS and NT, r = 0.643 between JS and NP, r = 0.686 between NP and NT, r = 0.581 between JS and NY; P ≤ 0.05).
The freely available information online on age-related macular degeneration varies by source but is generally of low quality. The material presented is difficult to interpret and exceeds the recommended reading level for health information. Most websites reviewed did not provide sufficient information using the grading scheme we used to support the patient in making medical decisions.
在美国，十大致盲原因之一是视力丧失，主要是由于年龄相关性眼病，如年龄相关性黄斑变性。随着人口老龄化，受此疾病影响的人数预计将会上升。患者越来越多地在互联网上搜索健康相关信息，但发布的网站之间没有标准。
评估针对年龄相关性黄斑变性的在线信息的质量、内容、可问责性和可读性。
这项横断面研究分析了 12 个提供有关年龄相关性黄斑变性信息的免费医疗网站，并将 PubMed 作为比较的黄金标准。共组成 34 个问题，包括与患者最相关的信息，每个网站均由一名玻璃体视网膜外科医生、两名玻璃体视网膜研究员和一名眼科住院医师独立评估。使用在线可读性工具分析可读性。使用 JAMA 基准评估每个网站的可问责性。
本研究使用了免费的在线信息。
所有网站的平均问卷得分为 136 分中的 90.23 分（标准差 17.56，95%置信区间 CI ±9.55）。网站的内容质量存在显著差异（ =.01）。所有网站的平均阅读水平为 11.44（标准差 1.75，95%置信区间 CI ±0.99）。内容准确性与平均阅读水平或 Google 排名之间没有显著相关性（r =.392， =.207 和 r =.133， =.732）。不包括 PubMed 时，只有一个网站达到了 JAMA 基准的全部 4 项要求。网站内容的准确性与 JAMA 基准之间没有相关性（r =.344， =.273）。4 名观察者中的 3 名观察者的观测者间可重复性相似（JS 和 NT 之间 r =.747，JS 和 NP 之间 r =.643，NP 和 NT 之间 r =.686，JS 和 NY 之间 r =.581；P 均≤0.05）。
针对年龄相关性黄斑变性的在线免费信息因来源而异，但总体质量较低。呈现的材料难以解释，超出了我们用于支持患者做出医疗决策的分级方案推荐的阅读水平。使用我们用来支持患者做出医疗决策的评分方案，大多数审查过的网站都没有提供足够的信息。
