Documentary quality versus veracity of information of the websites on syphilis and gonorrhea

Abstract

Objective: Analyze the possible relation between the documentary quality (DQ) versus the veracity of information (VI) on the syphilis and gonorrhea web pages. Methods: Descriptive cross-sectional study of websites containing information about syphilis and gonorrhea, by accessing this population through a Google. The quality was studied by using 8 variables belonging to DQ and 7 variables of the VI. Results: A total of 440 active websites mainly belonging to mass media and private entities was assessed. The fulfillment of DQ gave the following results: Mean 3.46 ± 0.07, median 4 and range from 0 to 7. The VI result was: median 4.07 ± 0.09, median 4 and range from 0 to 7. According to the search athwart syphilis or gonorrhea, the contrast of the median of the two indicators was: 3.55 vs 3.37 p = 0.181 and 4.14 vs 4.00 p = 0.442. No correlation was verified amid the data of DQ and VI (R = 0.04); p = 0.368. Similarly, no significance was observed when segregating data by disease, in the case of syphilis R = -0.03; p = 0.625 and on gonorrhea R = 0.12; p = 0.064. Conclusions: The DQ and VI bestowed low outcomes, which implies poor quality of syphilis and gonorrhea websites. According to infection (syphilis or gonorrhea), there were no meaningful differences amid the median values of the two indicators. Being acquainted with the authorship and affiliation of a website and the fact that it is tied to a prestigious web may be a factor to be deemed when predicting the VI of a website. The correlation amid the two indicators did not demonstrate an association, thus, knowing the DQ does not imply having the security of an adequate VI.

Transgender health information: assessing the quality of online resources

“…The results clearly show the need for quality scrutiny of health information as many of the online resources connected to transgender health information is not fulfilling the credibility criteria. The conclusion that the websites concerning transgender health remain subpar in quality is just similar to previous website quality assessment studies [for example Sanz-Lorente et al (2021), Guardiola-Wanden-Berghe et al (2011. However, for evaluating website quality, the Credibility Indicator proves to be a valuable tool.…”

“…health information the indicators of DQ suggests that the conclusion that no websites meet quality standards completely, which is similar to the previous study (Sanz-Lorente et al, 2021). Similarly, Horvath et al (2012) also examined that the majority of webpages included at least one credibility indicator that enhanced their credibility, while half of the webpages had only a single indicator.…”

“…The web has liberated the publishing process by making content auditing optional and open for all contributors. It is crucial to ensure the accuracy, quality and credibility of healthrelated web content as it can have unpredictable consequences in society (Sanz-Lorente et al, 2021). Liu et al (2023) differentiates credibility and quality of online information.…”

“…Ideally, websites should include unabridged details about their managers and their respective institutional affiliations in an "About Me/Us" section. This straightforward addition would significantly enhance the credibility of the information they provide (Sanz-Lorente et al, 2021). Guardiola-Wanden-Berghe et al (2011) commented that the initial quality criterion to consider might be the author's association with a reputable institution.…”

“…Similarly, Horvath et al (2012) also examined that the majority of webpages included at least one credibility indicator that enhanced their credibility, while half of the webpages had only a single indicator. Sanz-Lorente et al (2021) analysed that the lack of adherence to indicators necessitates a significant and immediate reassessment and improvement of these "virtual headquarters" (websites) since they serve as vital social references for individuals seeking health-related information. News portals (mean 5 5.16 ± 1.04) have highest mean score in documentary quality indicators, whereas, Clinic/Hospital (4.61 ± 0.25) consumed top mean score in calculating veracity of transgender health information.…”