• 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

相似文献

1
Analysis of the quality, accuracy, and readability of patient information on polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) on the internet available in English: a cross-sectional study.多囊卵巢综合征(PCOS)相关互联网患者信息的质量、准确性和可读性分析:一项横断面研究。
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2023 May 15;21(1):44. doi: 10.1186/s12958-023-01100-x.
2
Assessment of online patient education materials from major ophthalmologic associations.主要眼科协会在线患者教育材料评估。
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015 Apr;133(4):449-54. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2014.6104.
3
Readability assessment of online ophthalmic patient information.在线眼科患者信息的可读性评估。
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013 Dec;131(12):1610-6. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2013.5521.
4
Quality, Reliability, Technical Quality, and Readability of Google Online Information on Childhood Glaucoma.谷歌在线儿童青光眼信息的质量、可靠性、技术质量和可读性。
J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2024 May-Jun;61(3):198-203. doi: 10.3928/01913913-20231114-01. Epub 2023 Dec 19.
5
Quality and accuracy of patient-oriented Web-based information regarding tooth avulsion.关于牙齿脱落的面向患者的基于网络的信息的质量和准确性。
Dent Traumatol. 2022 Aug;38(4):299-308. doi: 10.1111/edt.12741. Epub 2022 Feb 28.
6
Quality, Reliability, Readability, and Accountability of Online Information on Leukocoria.关于白瞳症的在线信息的质量、可靠性、可读性和可问责性。
J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2024 Sep-Oct;61(5):332-338. doi: 10.3928/01913913-20240425-02. Epub 2024 May 30.
7
Readability analysis of online health information on preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP).在线预防暴露前药物(PrEP)相关健康信息的可读性分析。
Public Health. 2020 May;182:53-55. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.02.002. Epub 2020 Mar 11.
8
Patient-Directed Vasectomy Information: How Readable Is It?患者导向的输精管切除术信息:其可读性如何?
World J Mens Health. 2024 Apr;42(2):408-414. doi: 10.5534/wjmh.230033. Epub 2023 Sep 1.
9
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.
10
Transoral robotic surgery: Differences between online information and academic literature.经口机器人手术:在线信息与学术文献之间的差异。
Am J Otolaryngol. 2020 Jul-Aug;41(4):102395. doi: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2020.102395. Epub 2020 Jan 7.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparing orthodontic pre-treatment information provided by large language models.比较大语言模型提供的正畸治疗前信息。
BMC Oral Health. 2025 May 28;25(1):838. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-06246-1.
2
Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and the Internet of Things: A Scoping Review.多囊卵巢综合征与物联网:一项范围综述
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Aug 21;12(16):1671. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12161671.
3
Evaluation of the Quality and Readability of Web-Based Information Regarding Foreign Bodies of the Ear, Nose, and Throat: Qualitative Content Analysis.关于耳鼻咽喉异物的网络信息的质量和可读性评估:定性内容分析
JMIR Form Res. 2024 Aug 15;8:e55535. doi: 10.2196/55535.
4
Women's use of online health and social media resources to make sense of their polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) diagnosis: a qualitative study.女性利用在线健康和社交媒体资源来理解多囊卵巢综合征 (PCOS) 诊断:一项定性研究。
BMC Womens Health. 2024 Mar 5;24(1):157. doi: 10.1186/s12905-024-02993-5.
5
Lower Back Pain Imaging: A Readability Analysis.下背痛影像学:可读性分析
Cureus. 2023 Sep 13;15(9):e45174. doi: 10.7759/cureus.45174. eCollection 2023 Sep.

本文引用的文献

1
Impact of low health literacy on patients' health outcomes: a multicenter cohort study.低健康素养对患者健康结局的影响:一项多中心队列研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Sep 12;22(1):1148. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08527-9.
2
What can be done to improve polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) healthcare? Insights from semi-structured interviews with women in Canada.有哪些措施可以改善多囊卵巢综合征(PCOS)的医疗保健?对加拿大女性进行半结构化访谈的见解。
BMC Womens Health. 2022 May 10;22(1):157. doi: 10.1186/s12905-022-01734-w.
3
Online health information on induction of labour: A systematic review and quality assessment study.在线分娩诱导健康信息:系统评价和质量评估研究。
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2022 Apr;271:177-182. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.02.010. Epub 2022 Feb 14.
4
Effectiveness of Lifestyle Modification in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Patients with Obesity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.生活方式改变对肥胖型多囊卵巢综合征患者的有效性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Life (Basel). 2022 Feb 18;12(2):308. doi: 10.3390/life12020308.
5
Dupuytren's Contracture: The Readability of Online Information.杜普伊特伦挛缩症:在线信息的可读性
J Patient Exp. 2021 Oct 27;8:23743735211056431. doi: 10.1177/23743735211056431. eCollection 2021.
6
TMT-based proteomic and bioinformatic analyses of human granulosa cells from obese and normal-weight female subjects.基于 TMT 的人肥胖和正常体重女性颗粒细胞的蛋白质组学和生物信息学分析。
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2021 May 20;19(1):75. doi: 10.1186/s12958-021-00760-x.
7
(Mis)informed about what? What it means to be a science-literate citizen in a digital world.(被)误导的是什么?在数字世界中成为一个有科学素养的公民意味着什么。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Apr 13;118(15). doi: 10.1073/pnas.1912436117.
8
Using the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients Tool to Assess Patient Information on Appendicitis Websites: Systematic Search and Evaluation.使用 Ensuring Quality Information for Patients 工具评估阑尾炎网站上的患者信息:系统搜索和评估。
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Mar 26;23(3):e22618. doi: 10.2196/22618.
9
The Prevalence of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Brief Systematic Review.多囊卵巢综合征的患病率:一项简要的系统评价。
J Hum Reprod Sci. 2020 Oct-Dec;13(4):261-271. doi: 10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_95_18. Epub 2020 Dec 28.
10
Co-designing eHealth and Equity Solutions: Application of the Ophelia (Optimizing Health Literacy and Access) Process.共同设计电子健康和公平解决方案:奥菲莉亚(优化健康素养和获取)过程的应用。
Front Public Health. 2020 Nov 20;8:604401. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.604401. eCollection 2020.

多囊卵巢综合征(PCOS)相关互联网患者信息的质量、准确性和可读性分析:一项横断面研究。

Analysis of the quality, accuracy, and readability of patient information on polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) on the internet available in English: a cross-sectional study.

机构信息

University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, Split, 21000, Croatia.

Cochrane Croatia, Šoltanska 2, Split, 21000, Croatia.

出版信息

Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2023 May 15;21(1):44. doi: 10.1186/s12958-023-01100-x.

DOI:10.1186/s12958-023-01100-x
PMID:37189154
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10184410/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Online information about PCOS lacks reliability for patients seeking information about the disease. Thus, we aimed to perform an updated analysis of the quality, accuracy, and readability of patient information on PCOS available online.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study using the top five Google Trends search terms in English associated with PCOS, including "symptoms," "treatment," "test," "pregnancy," and "causes." Five separate searches in Bing, Yahoo, and Google were performed to obtain the first 10 unique webpages for each term that was categorized as commercial, non-profit organization, scientific resources, or private foundation. We used the 16-item DISCERN with Likert-responses (minimum 1, maximum 5) where the total is 80 and lowest is 16, clarity with the 32-item EQIP, where responses of no = 0 and yes = 1 (minimum 0, maximum 32), and accuracy scores with 1 denoting poor and 5 completely accurate information; low scores of each corresponded to poorly reported information. We assessed readability with Flesch-Kincaid reading ease index, where higher scores correspond to reading ease, and lower grades correspond to easier readability with Flesch-Kincaid grade level, Gunning-Fog, Coleman-Liau index, automated readability index, New Dale-Chall Readability, and simple measure of gobbledygook. We additionally assessed word and sentence characteristics. We used Kruskal-Wallis test to compare scores according to webpage categories.

RESULTS

Out of 150 webpages, most were commercial (n = 85, 57%), followed by non-profit organizations (n = 44, 29%), scientific resources (n = 13, 9%) and private foundations (n = 6, 4%). Google webpages had higher median DISCERN score ([Md] = 47.0) than Bing ([Md] = 42.0) and Yahoo ([Md] = 43.0) webpages; P = 0.023. No difference in EQIP scores according to search engine was found (P = 0.524). Predominantly, webpages from private foundations had higher DISCERN and EQIP scores, although comparisons were not statistically significant (P = 0.456) and P = 0.653.). Accuracy and readability were similar across search engines and webpage categories (P = 0.915, range 5.0-5.0) and (P = 0.208, range 4.0-5.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Quality and clarity of the data were fair according to search engine and category. Accuracy of information was high, showing that the public may encounter accurate information about PCOS. However, the readability of the information was high, reflecting a need for more readable resources about PCOS.

摘要

背景

对于寻求多囊卵巢综合征(PCOS)相关疾病信息的患者来说,在线信息的可靠性较差。因此,我们旨在对当前网上关于 PCOS 的患者信息的质量、准确性和可读性进行最新分析。

方法

我们采用了横断面研究方法,使用与 PCOS 相关的五个英语谷歌趋势搜索热门词汇,包括“症状”、“治疗”、“检查”、“妊娠”和“病因”。我们在 Bing、Yahoo 和 Google 上分别进行了五次单独的搜索,以获取每个术语的前 10 个独特网页,这些网页被分为商业、非营利组织、科学资源或私人基金会。我们使用了 16 项 DISCERN 量表(最低 1 分,最高 5 分),总分 80 分,最低 16 分;使用了 32 项 EQIP 量表(回答为否记 0,回答为是记 1,最低 0 分,最高 32 分);使用了准确性量表,1 分表示信息较差,5 分表示信息完全准确;每个量表的得分越低表示信息报告越差。我们使用 Flesch-Kincaid 阅读流畅度指数评估可读性,分数越高表示阅读越容易,而 Flesch-Kincaid 年级水平、Gunning-Fog、Coleman-Liau 指数、自动化可读性指数、New Dale-Chall 可读性和简单测难词指数越低表示阅读越容易。我们还评估了词汇和句子特征。我们使用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验比较了根据网页类别得出的分数。

结果

在 150 个网页中,大多数是商业网页(n=85,57%),其次是非营利组织网页(n=44,29%)、科学资源网页(n=13,9%)和私人基金会网页(n=6,4%)。谷歌网页的 DISCERN 量表中位数(Md=47.0)高于 Bing(Md=42.0)和 Yahoo(Md=43.0)网页(P=0.023)。根据搜索引擎的不同,EQIP 量表得分没有差异(P=0.524)。虽然私人基金会的网页在 DISCERN 和 EQIP 量表上的得分较高,但比较没有统计学意义(P=0.456),P=0.653。)。搜索引擎和网页类别之间的准确性和可读性相似(P=0.915,范围 5.0-5.0)和(P=0.208,范围 4.0-5.0)。

结论

根据搜索引擎和类别,数据的质量和清晰度都还不错。信息的准确性较高,这表明公众可能会遇到有关 PCOS 的准确信息。然而,信息的可读性较高,反映出人们需要更多有关 PCOS 的易读资源。