No abstract

Health care providers should be aware of information available on the Internet to ensure proper patient care. The current analysis assesses the reliability, quality, and readability of internet information describing rhytidectomy. Previously validated survey instruments to assess the reliability, quality, and readability of online websites describing rhytidectomy were used. An internet search using Google with the search term “facelift” was conducted. The first 50 search results were reviewed, and 36 were deemed appropriate to be included in this analysis. Websites were divided based on type of authorship into professional organization, academic, physician based, and unidentified. The validated DISCERN instrument was used to determine reliability, quality, and overall rating of each site. The Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) were used to measure readability. A 1 to 3 point scale was used to rate websites, with a higher number indicating a website that possessed either greater reliability or greater quality. Mean scores for reliability ranged from 1.7 (±0.99) in the academic group to 2.0 (±0.12) in the unidentified group. Mean scores for quality ranged from 1.5 (±0.13) in the unidentified group to 1.7 (±0.38) in the physician-based group. The highest overall rating was 1.4 (±0.22 and ± 0.31, respectively) in the unidentified and physician-based groups. The lowest overall rating was 1 (±0.58) in the academic group. FRESs ranged from 21.6 to 74.6. FKGLs ranged from 6.9 to 13.9. Information available online regarding rhytidectomy may be significantly deficient in reliability, quality, and readability. These deficiencies are present in articles with all types of author affiliations. This underscores the clinicians' duty to provide patients with high-quality information at an adequate level of comprehension.

Physicians should be aware of both websites and videos available online regarding the otoplasty procedure to provide quality care. This study systematically analyzes the authorships, reliability, quality, and readability of the websites, as well as the authorships and primary objectives of the videos regarding otoplasty. Validated instruments were used to analyze the reliability, quality, and readability of websites, and videos were systematically categorized and analyzed. A Google search was conducted, and the first five pages of results were included in this study. After excluding unrelated websites, the remaining 44 websites were categorized by authorship (physician, patient, academic, or unaffiliated) and were analyzed using the validated DISCERN instrument for reliability and quality, as well as various other validated instruments to measure readability. A YouTube search was also conducted, and the first 50 relevant videos were included in the study. These videos were categorized by authorship and their primary objective. Website authorships were physician-dominated. Reliability, quality, and overall DISCERN score differ between the four authorship groups by a statistically significant margin (Kruskall-Wallis test, < 0.05). Unaffiliated websites were the most reliable, and physician websites were the least reliable. Academic websites were of the highest quality, and patient websites were of the lowest quality. Readability did not differ significantly between the groups, though the readability measurements made showed a general lack of material easily readable by the general public. YouTube was likewise dominated by physician-authored videos. While the physician-authored videos sought mainly to inform and to advertise, patient-authored videos sought mainly to provide the patient's perspective. Academic organizations showed very little representation on YouTube, and the YouTube views on otoplasty videos were dominated by the top 20 videos, which represented over 93% of the total views of videos included in this study.

A growing number of patients are seeking answers for their health concerns online. This study assesses the reliability, quality, and readability of online materials patients have access to through the Internet and evaluates the social media presence of information providers. An online search was conducted for facial rejuvenation by utilizing three ubiquitously used web search engines: Google, Bing, and Yahoo. The first 25 result pages were collected from each search engine, and exclusionary criteria were applied to exclude online stores and advertisements. Website reliability and quality were assessed via the DISCERN method. Readability was measured through six measurements: Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fox score, SMOG index, Coleman Liau index, and automated readability index. Social media presence and profile followers on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram were determined to gauge social media presence. Exclusionary criteria yielded 41 unique websites, with the majority of websites authored by physicians (54%) followed by professional organizations (19%). The DISCERN method demonstrated that journal websites yielded the highest overall quality (4.00) and physician websites yielded the lowest (2.72). Readability analysis demonstrated that online forums proved the most challenging to read, and encyclopedia articles were the least challenging. Physician websites maintained the highest social media presence (95%) followed by professional organizations (75%). However, professional organizations had more social media followers in comparison to physician websites. Physician websites and professional organizations overwhelmingly command social media presence compared to other information providers and provide information with serious deficits in reliability and quality. A strong majority of online information also surpasses the health care literacy of patients. This poses a serious concern for physicians who need to provide and guide patients to high quality and reliable information.

No abstract