Objectives To investigate the quality and readability of online patient information on treatment for erectile dysfunction using a Google search. Materials and methods The results of a Google search for “erectile dysfunction treatment” were reviewed. Webpages that contained written information on erectile dysfunction except those containing scientific publications and paywall protected webpages were included in further analysis. Typographic and treatment information were recorded. Readability was assessed using the Fleisch‐Kincaid grade level, the Gunning‐Fog index, the Coleman‐Liau index, and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook. Website quality was assessed using the DISCERN instrument, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, and presence of Health on the net (HON) code certification. Website typography, discussed treatment types, readability scores, and quality measures were reported. Parametric and nonparametric statistical tests were used to compare the data as appropriate dependent on the normality of data. Results Eighty‐one webpages were included. Urologists and hospitals were the most common producers with 15 (18%) each. Seventy‐four (91%) webpages contained specific information on treatment for erectile dysfunction and 15 (19%) contained advertisements. Seventeen (21%) webpages were HON code certified. The median DISCERN score was 35 (IQR 26.5‐44) out of 80. The mean combined readability score was 12.32 (SD 1.91). The median JAMA benchmark score was 1 (IQR 1‐2) out of 4. Google rank had a small negative correlation with DISCERN score (τ = −0.16, P = .036). HON code certified webpages had higher DISCERN scores (median of 44 [IQR 35‐58.5] vs 32.5 [IQR 25.25‐42.25], U = 832, Z = 6561, P < .001). A linear regression was used to predict DISCERN score based on meeting each JAMA benchmark criterion (F(2, 78) = 22.7, P < .001) R2 = 0.368, P < .001. Within this model the effects of meeting attribution (β = 11.09) and currency (β = 8.79) criterion were significant. Conclusions The quality of online information on treatment for erectile dysfunction is generally poor. However, easy to identify markers of quality like HON code certification, or meeting JAMA benchmark criterion for attribution and currency may help patients to navigate to better quality online information on treatment for erectile dysfunction. Webpages are written at senior high school level, above any recommendations for patient medical information. Health professionals should use validated instruments to assess the quality of online information on treatment for erectile dysfunction prior to publication to improve their utility for patients.
IntroductionBladder cancer is the third most common urological malignancy affecting Australians, with key modifiable risk factors. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people suffer from a higher prevalence of cancer-modifiable risk factors, are diagnosed with bladder cancer at a younger age, and have poorer survival rates compared with the general population. A comprehensive overview of the state of current knowledge on bladder cancer in this population is required.Methods and analysisA search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and Web of Science databases, along with appropriate grey literature sources will be conducted between the 1 April 2022 and 30 April 2022. The reference lists of all included studies will be reviewed for additional appropriate sources. The national bladder cancer dataset compiled by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare will also be included as a source. All relevant sources meeting inclusion criteria, published in English, from inception onwards will be included. Dual independent screening of titles and abstracts prior to full-text review will be undertaken for all identified results during the initial searches. Preliminary findings will be reviewed with stakeholders, to seek culturally appropriate feedback on the implications of the results. Results will be reported in tabular form, accompanied by a narrative synthesis with comparisons to the wider bladder cancer population.Ethics and disseminationEthics review will not be required, as only publicly available data will be analysed. Findings from the scoping review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific meetings to stakeholders.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.