TY - JOUR
T1 - A comprehensive scoping review to identify standards for the development of health information resources on the internet
AU - Abdel-Wahab, Noha
AU - Rai, Devesh
AU - Siddhanamatha, Harish
AU - Dodeja, Abhinav
AU - Suarez-Almazor, Maria E.
AU - Lopez-Olivo, Maria A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Abdel-Wahab et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2019/6
Y1 - 2019/6
N2 - Background Online health information, if evidence-based and unbiased, can improve patients’ and caregivers’ health knowledge and assist them in disease management and health care decision-making. Objective To identify standards for the development of health information resources on the internet for patients. Methods We searched in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for publications describing evaluation instruments for websites providing health information. Eligible instruments were identified by three independent reviewers and disagreements resolved by consensus. Items reported were extracted and categorized into seven domains (accuracy, completeness and comprehensiveness, technical elements, design and aesthetics, usability, accessibility, and readability) that were previously thought to be a minimum requirement for websites. Results One hundred eleven articles met inclusion criteria, reporting 92 evaluation instruments (1609 items). We found 74 unique items that we grouped into the seven domains. For the accuracy domain, one item evaluated information provided in concordance with current guidelines. For completeness and comprehensiveness, 18 items described the disease with respect to various topics such as etiology or therapy, among others. For technical elements, 27 items evaluated disclosure of authorship, sponsorship, affiliation, editorial process, feedback process, privacy, and data protection. For design and aesthetics, 10 items evaluated consistent layout and relevant graphics and images. For usability, 10 items evaluated ease of navigation and functionality of internal search engines. For accessibility, five items evaluated the availability of websites to people with audiovisual disabilities. For readability, three items evaluated conversational writing style and use of a readability tool to determine the reading level of the text. Conclusion We identified standards for the development of online patient health information. This proposed instrument can serve as a guideline to develop and improve how health information is presented on the internet.
AB - Background Online health information, if evidence-based and unbiased, can improve patients’ and caregivers’ health knowledge and assist them in disease management and health care decision-making. Objective To identify standards for the development of health information resources on the internet for patients. Methods We searched in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for publications describing evaluation instruments for websites providing health information. Eligible instruments were identified by three independent reviewers and disagreements resolved by consensus. Items reported were extracted and categorized into seven domains (accuracy, completeness and comprehensiveness, technical elements, design and aesthetics, usability, accessibility, and readability) that were previously thought to be a minimum requirement for websites. Results One hundred eleven articles met inclusion criteria, reporting 92 evaluation instruments (1609 items). We found 74 unique items that we grouped into the seven domains. For the accuracy domain, one item evaluated information provided in concordance with current guidelines. For completeness and comprehensiveness, 18 items described the disease with respect to various topics such as etiology or therapy, among others. For technical elements, 27 items evaluated disclosure of authorship, sponsorship, affiliation, editorial process, feedback process, privacy, and data protection. For design and aesthetics, 10 items evaluated consistent layout and relevant graphics and images. For usability, 10 items evaluated ease of navigation and functionality of internal search engines. For accessibility, five items evaluated the availability of websites to people with audiovisual disabilities. For readability, three items evaluated conversational writing style and use of a readability tool to determine the reading level of the text. Conclusion We identified standards for the development of online patient health information. This proposed instrument can serve as a guideline to develop and improve how health information is presented on the internet.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067516731&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85067516731&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0218342
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0218342
M3 - Article
C2 - 31220126
AN - SCOPUS:85067516731
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 14
JO - PloS one
JF - PloS one
IS - 6
M1 - e0218342
ER -