• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

意义未明的单克隆丙种球蛋白病互联网信息资源的准确性和可靠性——我们的患者能获取哪些信息?

Accuracy and Reliability of Internet Resources for Information on Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance-What Information Is out There for Our Patients?

作者信息

Kreutzer Emma Pauline, Sauer Sandra, Kriegsmann Mark, Staemmler Henrike, Egerer Gerlinde, Kriegsmann Katharina

机构信息

Department of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.

Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Heidelberg, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.

出版信息

Cancers (Basel). 2021 Sep 7;13(18):4508. doi: 10.3390/cancers13184508.

DOI:10.3390/cancers13184508
PMID:34572733
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8465467/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Online information gathering can increase patients' engagement in decision-making. The quality of online resources available for monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) was evaluated.

METHODS

900 websites from Google, Bing, Yahoo, and 150 YouTube videos were assessed.

RESULTS

The websites did not differ regarding their search rank or between the search engines. The median time since last update was 24 months. The 86 unique websites showed a medium to poor general quality (JAMA score 3/4, only 8.1% websites with a valid HON certificate). The patient- (user-) focused quality was poor (sum DISCERN score 27/80 points). The reading level was difficult (11th US school grade). The content level was very low (13/50 points). 12.8% of websites contained misleading/wrong facts. Websites provided by scientific/governmental organizations had a higher content level. For the 61 unique videos, the median time since upload was 34 months. The videos showed a medium general quality (HON Foundation score). The patient- (user-) focused quality was poor (sum DISCERN score 24 points). The content level was very low (6 points).

CONCLUSION

MGUS-relevant online sources showed a low quality that was provided on a high reading level. Incorporation of quality indices and regular review of online content is warranted.

摘要

背景

在线信息收集可提高患者参与决策的程度。对意义未明的单克隆丙种球蛋白病(MGUS)的在线资源质量进行了评估。

方法

评估了来自谷歌、必应、雅虎的900个网站以及150个YouTube视频。

结果

各网站在搜索排名方面或搜索引擎之间并无差异。上次更新以来的中位时间为24个月。86个独立网站的总体质量中等偏下(《美国医学会杂志》评分:3/4,仅有8.1%的网站拥有有效的健康在线基金会(HON)证书)。以患者(用户)为中心的质量较差(DISCERN总分27/80分)。阅读难度较大(相当于美国学校11年级水平)。内容水平非常低(13/50分)。12.8%的网站包含误导性/错误信息。科学/政府组织提供的网站内容水平较高。对于61个独立视频,上传以来的中位时间为34个月。这些视频的总体质量中等(健康在线基金会评分)。以患者(用户)为中心的质量较差(DISCERN总分24分)。内容水平非常低(6分)。

结论

与MGUS相关的在线资源质量较低,且阅读难度较大。有必要纳入质量指标并定期审查在线内容。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1827/8465467/8208c3317026/cancers-13-04508-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1827/8465467/3b7552da07fd/cancers-13-04508-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1827/8465467/8208c3317026/cancers-13-04508-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1827/8465467/3b7552da07fd/cancers-13-04508-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1827/8465467/8208c3317026/cancers-13-04508-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Accuracy and Reliability of Internet Resources for Information on Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance-What Information Is out There for Our Patients?意义未明的单克隆丙种球蛋白病互联网信息资源的准确性和可靠性——我们的患者能获取哪些信息?
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Sep 7;13(18):4508. doi: 10.3390/cancers13184508.
2
Quality of Online Information on Multiple Myeloma Available for Laypersons.多发性骨髓瘤相关网络信息对非专业人士的适用性评估。
Curr Oncol. 2022 Jun 27;29(7):4522-4540. doi: 10.3390/curroncol29070358.
3
Evaluating the Quality, Content, and Readability of Online Resources for Failed Back Spinal Surgery.评估失败性脊柱手术后在线资源的质量、内容和可读性。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019 Apr 1;44(7):494-502. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002870.
4
Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure: an assessment of the quality and readability of online information.经颈静脉肝内门体分流术(TIPS)操作:在线信息质量和可读性的评估。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021 May 5;21(1):149. doi: 10.1186/s12911-021-01513-x.
5
Accuracy and Reliability of Internet Resources Providing Information on Obstructive Sleep Apnea.提供阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停信息的互联网资源的准确性和可靠性。
J Clin Sleep Med. 2018 Oct 15;14(10):1717-1723. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.7380.
6
Osteotomy around the knee: Assessment of quality, content and readability of online information.膝关节周围截骨术:在线信息的质量、内容及可读性评估
Knee. 2021 Jan;28:139-150. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2020.11.010. Epub 2020 Dec 23.
7
Is the internet a sufficient source of information on sarcoidosis?互联网是结节病信息的充足来源吗?
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Jun 27;10:1217146. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1217146. eCollection 2023.
8
Adult orthodontics: a quality assessment of Internet information.成人正畸:互联网信息的质量评估
J Orthod. 2016 Sep;43(3):186-92. doi: 10.1080/14653125.2016.1194599. Epub 2016 Aug 2.
9
A Quality Assessment of the Information Accessible to Patients on the Internet About the Whipple Procedure.互联网上有关胰十二指肠切除术的患者可获取信息的质量评估。
World J Surg. 2021 Jun;45(6):1853-1859. doi: 10.1007/s00268-021-05989-6. Epub 2021 Feb 12.
10
Online resources as a source of information for exercise and physical activity in solid organ transplant recipients.在线资源作为实体器官移植受者运动和体育活动信息的来源。
Front Sports Act Living. 2024 Apr 30;6:1353663. doi: 10.3389/fspor.2024.1353663. eCollection 2024.

引用本文的文献

1
Web-Based Information on Spinal Cord Stimulation: Qualitative Assessment of Publicly Accessible Online Resources.基于网络的脊髓刺激信息:公共可访问在线资源的定性评估。
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2024 Feb 23;10:e50031. doi: 10.2196/50031.
2
Quality of Online Information on Multiple Myeloma Available for Laypersons.多发性骨髓瘤相关网络信息对非专业人士的适用性评估。
Curr Oncol. 2022 Jun 27;29(7):4522-4540. doi: 10.3390/curroncol29070358.

本文引用的文献

1
Quality and readability of web-based Arabic health information on COVID-19: an infodemiological study.基于网络的 COVID-19 阿拉伯文健康信息的质量和可读性:一项信息流行病学研究。
BMC Public Health. 2021 Jan 18;21(1):151. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10218-9.
2
Quality and readability of internet information about stuttering.互联网关于口吃的信息质量和可读性。
J Fluency Disord. 2021 Mar;67:105824. doi: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2020.105824. Epub 2020 Dec 8.
3
Quality and readability of English-language Internet information for vestibular disorders.
关于前庭障碍的英文互联网信息的质量和可读性。
J Vestib Res. 2020;30(2):63-72. doi: 10.3233/VES-200698.
4
Quality and readability of online information on dental treatment for snoring and obstructive sleep apnea.关于治疗打鼾和阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停的牙科治疗的在线信息的质量和可读性。
Int J Med Inform. 2020 Jan;133:104000. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104000. Epub 2019 Oct 19.
5
Evaluating and providing quality health information for adolescents and young adults with cancer.评估和提供癌症青少年和青年患者的优质健康信息。
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2019 Oct;66(10):e27931. doi: 10.1002/pbc.27931. Epub 2019 Jul 19.
6
Accuracy and Reliability of Internet Resources Providing Information on Obstructive Sleep Apnea.提供阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停信息的互联网资源的准确性和可靠性。
J Clin Sleep Med. 2018 Oct 15;14(10):1717-1723. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.7380.
7
Assessing the quality, reliability and readability of online health information regarding systemic lupus erythematosus.评估关于系统性红斑狼疮的在线健康信息的质量、可靠性和可读性。
Lupus. 2018 Oct;27(12):1911-1917. doi: 10.1177/0961203318793213. Epub 2018 Aug 16.
8
Web-based information on oral dysplasia and precancer of the mouth - Quality and readability.口腔发育异常和口腔癌前病变的网络信息 - 质量和可读性。
Oral Oncol. 2018 Jul;82:69-74. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2018.05.003. Epub 2018 May 17.
9
Quality and readability of internet-based information on halitosis.基于互联网的口臭信息的质量和可读性。
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2018 Mar;125(3):215-222. doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2017.12.001. Epub 2017 Dec 8.
10
How I manage monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance.如何管理意义未明的单克隆丙种球蛋白病。
Blood. 2018 Jan 11;131(2):163-173. doi: 10.1182/blood-2017-09-807560. Epub 2017 Nov 28.