scholarly journals You Get What You Pay for on Health Care Question and Answer Platforms: Nonparticipant Observational Study

10.2196/13534 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. e13534
Author(s):  
Fatemeh Ameri ◽  
Kathleen Keeling ◽  
Reza Salehnejad
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Design Features ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Platform Design ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Health Advice ◽  
Quality Health ◽  
Advice Quality

Background Seeking health information on the internet is very popular despite the debatable ability of lay users to evaluate the quality of health information and uneven quality of information available on the Web. Consulting the internet for health information is pervasive, particularly when other sources are inaccessible because of time, distance, and money constraints or when sensitive or embarrassing questions are to be explored. Question and answer (Q&A) platforms are Web-based services that provide personalized health advice upon the information seekers’ request. However, it is not clear how the quality of health advices is ensured on these platforms. Objective The objective of this study was to identify how platform design impacts the quality of Web-based health advices and equal access to health information on the internet. Methods A total of 900 Q&As were collected from 9 Q&A platforms with different design features. Data on the design features for each platform were generated. Paid physicians evaluated the data to quantify the quality of health advices. Guided by the literature, the design features that affected information quality were identified and recorded for each Q&A platform. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator and unbiased regression tree methods were used for the analysis. Results Q&A platform design and health advice quality were related. Expertise of information providers (beta=.48; P=.001), financial incentive (beta=.4; P=.001), external reputation (beta=.28; P=.002), and question quality (beta=.12; P=.001) best predicted health advice quality. Virtual incentive, Web 2.0 mechanisms, and reputation systems were not associated with health advice quality. Conclusions Access to high-quality health advices on the internet is unequal and skewed toward high-income and high-literacy groups. However, there are possibilities to generate high-quality health advices for free.

scholarly journals You Get What You Pay for on Health Care Question and Answer Platforms: Nonparticipant Observational Study (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatemeh Ameri ◽  
Kathleen Keeling ◽  
Reza Salehnejad
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Design Features ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Platform Design ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Health Advice ◽  
Quality Health ◽  
Advice Quality

BACKGROUND Seeking health information on the internet is very popular despite the debatable ability of lay users to evaluate the quality of health information and uneven quality of information available on the Web. Consulting the internet for health information is pervasive, particularly when other sources are inaccessible because of time, distance, and money constraints or when sensitive or embarrassing questions are to be explored. Question and answer (Q&amp;A) platforms are Web-based services that provide personalized health advice upon the information seekers’ request. However, it is not clear how the quality of health advices is ensured on these platforms. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to identify how platform design impacts the quality of Web-based health advices and equal access to health information on the internet. METHODS A total of 900 Q&amp;As were collected from 9 Q&amp;A platforms with different design features. Data on the design features for each platform were generated. Paid physicians evaluated the data to quantify the quality of health advices. Guided by the literature, the design features that affected information quality were identified and recorded for each Q&amp;A platform. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator and unbiased regression tree methods were used for the analysis. RESULTS Q&amp;A platform design and health advice quality were related. Expertise of information providers (beta=.48; <italic>P</italic>=.001), financial incentive (beta=.4; <italic>P</italic>=.001), external reputation (beta=.28; <italic>P</italic>=.002), and question quality (beta=.12; <italic>P</italic>=.001) best predicted health advice quality. Virtual incentive, Web 2.0 mechanisms, and reputation systems were not associated with health advice quality. CONCLUSIONS Access to high-quality health advices on the internet is unequal and skewed toward high-income and high-literacy groups. However, there are possibilities to generate high-quality health advices for free.

Quality of Health Information on the Internet

2009 ◽  
pp. 443-455
Author(s):  
Kleopatra Alamantariotou
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Information Quality ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
The Internet ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Use Of The Internet ◽  
Effective Use

Recent statistics show that the World Wide Web has now grown to over 100 million sites: a phenomenal expansion in only 15 years (Mulligan 2007). It has been estimated that there are 100,000 sites offering health related information (Wilson 2002). As the amount of health information increases, the public find it increasingly difficult to decide what to accept and what to reject (Burgess 2007). Searching for information on the internet is both deceptively easy and the same time frustratingly difficult (Kiley 2002). The challenge for consumers is to find high quality, relevant information as quickly as possible. There has been ongoing debate about the quality of information aimed at patients and the general public and opinions differ on how it can be improved (Stepperd 1999). The purpose of this chapter is to provide a brief overview of the different perspectives on information quality and to review the main criteria for assessing the quality of health information on the internet. Pointers are provided to enable both clinicians and patients find high quality information sources. An understanding of these issues should help health professionals and patients to make effective use of the internet.

Web-Based Information for Patients and Providers

2020 ◽  
pp. 19-33
Author(s):  
Izabella Lejbkowicz
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Web Sites ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Online Health Information ◽  
World Population ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Access To Health ◽  
The Impact

The exponential development of Information Technologies revolutionized healthcare. A significant aspect of this revolution is the access to health information in the Internet. The Internet World Stats estimates that 56.8% of the world population used the Internet in March 2019, an increase of 1,066% from 2000. According to The Pew Research Center survey of 2012 81% of Americans used the internet and 72% of them searched for health information. Even though there is a lack in more recent data on the percentage of online health information seekers, it is clear that this trend is on the rise. This chapter focuses on the characteristics of the search for online health information by patients and providers, investigates features related to the quality of health web sites, and discusses the impact of these searches on healthcare.

scholarly journals Web-based health Information Seeking and eHealth Literacy among College students. A Self-report study

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatemeh KHademian ◽  
Mahsa Roozrokh Arshadi Montazer ◽  
Azam Aslani
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Information Seeking ◽  
Health Resources ◽  
Self Report ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Health Information Seeking ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Ehealth Literacy ◽  
Quality Health

Objective. This study aimed to assess web-based health information seeking and eHealth literacy among Iranian college students. Methods. The study was conducted in five colleges of the Shiraz University of Medical Sciences in Iran during 2018. The data were collected by a researcher-made questionnaire consisting of seven questions on a 4-point Likert-type scale, with scores ranging from 7 to 28. These questions were: ′I know how to use the Internet to answer my questions about health′, ′I think there is enough information about health-related issues on the Internet′, ′I know the vocabulary used in health issues on the Internet′, ′I can tell high-quality health resources from low-quality health resources on the Internet′, ′I know how to use the health information I find on the Internet to help me′, ′I feel confident in using information from the Internet to make health decisions′, and ′Searching for health-related information on the Internet will increase my knowledge in this field′. High eHealth literacy level is defined as above the total mean score and low eHealth literacy level is defined as lower than the total mean score. Results. In all, 386 college students participated in the study. The results showed that the mean score of eHealth literacy was 19.11 out of 28; 205 participants (54.4%) had low eHealth literacy. In addition, the students used the Internet to search for information regarding diseases symptoms (70%), physical illnesses (67.1%), existing treatments (65%), and diagnosis (63.1%). Conclusion. The results showed that participants in this study usually searched for illnesses, symptoms, and treatments after they got sick and paid little attention to other aspects related to integral health.How to cite this article: KHademian F, Roozrokh M, Aslani A. Web-based health Information Seeking and eHealth Literacy among College students. A Self-report study. Invest. Educ. Enferm. 2020. 38(1):e08.

Quality of Health Information on the Internet

2011 ◽  
pp. 204-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kleopatra Alamantariotou
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Information Quality ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
The Internet ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Use Of The Internet ◽  
Effective Use

Recent statistics show that the World Wide Web has now grown to over 100 million sites: a phenomenal expansion in only 15 years (Mulligan 2007). It has been estimated that there are 100,000 sites offering health related information (Wilson 2002). As the amount of health information increases, the public find it increasingly difficult to decide what to accept and what to reject (Burgess 2007). Searching for information on the internet is both deceptively easy and the same time frustratingly difficult (Kiley 2002). The challenge for consumers is to find high quality, relevant information as quickly as possible. There has been ongoing debate about the quality of information aimed at patients and the general public and opinions differ on how it can be improved (Stepperd 1999). The purpose of this chapter is to provide a brief overview of the different perspectives on information quality and to review the main criteria for assessing the quality of health information on the internet. Pointers are provided to enable both clinicians and patients find high quality information sources. An understanding of these issues should help health professionals and patients to make effective use of the internet.

scholarly journals Empowering Patients and Health Professionals in the Arab World: The King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Arabic Health Encyclopedia on the Web

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (01) ◽  
pp. 125-130
Author(s):  
M. M. Altuwaijri
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Arab World ◽  
Arab Countries ◽  
International Standards ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Study Results ◽  
The World ◽  
Quality Health

SummaryThe purpose of this paper is to describe the needs and the process of establishing an online Arabic health encyclopedia to empower patients and health professionals with trustworthy information.A study was conducted by King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences in collaboration with Health on the Net (HON) Foundation to review the quality of Arabic health information on the internet. A review of health portals in other languages was performed. Meetings were conducted to investigate areas of collaboration with different stakeholders including: WHO, HON, the U.S. National Library of Medicine, and the NHS.The results of the assessment of Arabic health sites showed that a very small percentage (almost 4%) meets international standards. The study results call for immediate action to improve the trustworthiness of Arabic health information on the net. This will be achieved by establishing a reliable Arabic health encyclopedia and by encouraging health professionals from all Arab countries to contribute to its creation. It is important for the 300 million Arabic citizens around the world to be able to access valuable health information on the internet.More than 300 million Arab citizens around the world have missed the opportunity to use the internet to provide them with quality health information. Hence, to bridge this gap, a new project was launched to develop an online Arabic health encyclopedia. Moreover, this study proposes an Arabic health information foundation be established to govern and accredit the Arabic health websites, and to work in collaboration with HON, to regulate and promote the quality of health information on the internet in Arab countries.

scholarly journals Using the Google™ Search Engine for Health Information: Is There a Problem? Case Study: Supplements for Cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah C Cai ◽  
Leanne E King ◽  
Johanna T Dwyer
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Search Engine ◽  
Information Quality ◽  
Nutrition Information ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Search Results ◽  
Health And Nutrition ◽  
Quality Rating

ABSTRACT We assessed the quality of online health and nutrition information using a Google™ search on “supplements for cancer”. Search results were scored using the Health Information Quality Index (HIQI), a quality-rating tool consisting of 12 objective criteria related to website domain, lack of commercial aspects, and authoritative nature of the health and nutrition information provided. Possible scores ranged from 0 (lowest) to 12 (“perfect” or highest quality). After eliminating irrelevant results, the remaining 160 search results had median and mean scores of 8. One-quarter of the results were of high quality (score of 10–12). There was no correlation between high-quality scores and early appearance in the sequence of search results, where results are presumably more visible. Also, 496 advertisements, over twice the number of search results, appeared. We conclude that the Google™ search engine may have shortcomings when used to obtain information on dietary supplements and cancer.

scholarly journals Quality in crisis: a systematic review of the quality of health systems in humanitarian settings

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keely Jordan ◽  
Todd P. Lewis ◽  
Bayard Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health System ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
System Level ◽  
System Quality ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Humanitarian Settings ◽  
Quality Health

Abstract Background There is a growing concern that the quality of health systems in humanitarian crises and the care they provide has received little attention. To help better understand current practice and research on health system quality, this paper aimed to examine the evidence on the quality of health systems in humanitarian settings. Methods This systematic review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol. The context of interest was populations affected by humanitarian crisis in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs). We included studies where the intervention of interest, health services for populations affected by crisis, was provided by the formal health system. Our outcome of interest was the quality of the health system. We included primary research studies, from a combination of information sources, published in English between January 2000 and January 2019 using quantitative and qualitative methods. We used the High Quality Health Systems Framework to analyze the included studies by quality domain and sub-domain. Results We identified 2285 articles through our search, of which 163 were eligible for full-text review, and 55 articles were eligible for inclusion in our systematic review. Poor diagnosis, inadequate patient referrals, and inappropriate treatment of illness were commonly cited barriers to quality care. There was a strong focus placed on the foundations of a health system with emphasis on the workforce and tools, but a limited focus on the health impacts of health systems. The review also suggests some barriers to high quality health systems that are specific to humanitarian settings such as language barriers for refugees in their host country, discontinued care for migrant populations with chronic conditions, and fears around provider safety. Conclusion The review highlights a large gap in the measurement of quality both at the point of care and at the health system level. There is a need for further work particularly on health system measurement strategies, accountability mechanisms, and patient-centered approaches in humanitarian settings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document