MAPPinfo, mapping quality of health information: study protocol for a validation study of an assessment instrument

Abstract

IntroductionHealth information is a prerequisite of informed decision-making. Criteria for development, content and presentation have recently been published in a corresponding guideline. Within a systematic search, 27 relevant checklists were identified, none of them, however, complying with the guideline or providing reasonably operationalised measurement items. Therefore, a draft of a checklist with 19 criteria was drafted. The current study aims at developing and validating this measure of quality.Methods and analysisThe validation design consists of five single studies to be conducted at the University of Halle-Wittenberg/Germany and Graz/Austria. (1) Achieving content validity through expert reviews of the first draft, (2) achieving feasibility using ‘think aloud’ in piloting with untrained users, (3) pretesting the instrument applied to health information materials without use of secondary sources: determining inter-rater reliability and criterion validity, (4) determining construct validity using information on proceedings and methods in the development process provided by the developers and (5) determining divergent validity in comparison with the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQUIP) (expanded) Scale. The substudies will use varying samples of experts, students and developers and will apply the instrument to materials of various domains. Sample sizes will be adjusted to the particular research designs and questions. Analyses will employ qualitative methods, such as content analyses and discourse within the expert panel, and correlation-based methods both for determining inter-rater reliability and validity.Ethics and disseminationThe project is approved by the ethics committee of the Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (approval number: 2019 115). Results will be published, and the instrument made accessible on public health platforms. It is meant to become a certification standard. MAPPinfo can be used as a screening instrument without training or secondary sources. Although developed in the German language, the instrument will be applicable also in other languages.Trial registration numberAsPredected22546; date of registration: 24 July 2019.Protocol versionJuly 2020.

MAPPinfo ‐ mapping quality of health information: Validation study of an assessment instrument

“…After conceiving and drafting the instrument, five validation steps were carried out (hereafter called sub-studies). An English translation of the validated final version of the instrument is accessible at the homepage of the Stiftung Gesundheitswissen [ 11 ]. A fact sheet on the instrument is provided in Box 1 , an overview with items and domains in Table 1 .…”

“…In this article, we report the results of the first validation study of MAPPinfo which were gained in accordance with a previously published protocol [ 9 ]. The study determined the checklist’s reliability in terms of inter-rater-agreement.…”

“…Therefore, the project “Mapping the quality of health information” (MAPPinfo) was initiated to operationalise the criteria of the guideline evidence-based health information, thus providing an instrument to assess the quality of health information [ 9 ].…”

“…We identified 27 assessment tools. However, none of them fully fulfilled all of the four defined requirements (validated, evidence-based criteria complete, non-evidence-based criteria avoided, operationalisation provided) [ 9 ]. Eleven tools fulfilled two or three of the requirements.…”

Does Search Engine Optimization come along with high-quality content?

“…When asked about issues concerning coping with illness, about half of respondents (49%) said the trustworthiness of health information was difficult to assess, followed by those who found it difficult to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of certain forms of treatment (45%) and judging when to seek a second opinion (42%) [41]. Although several initiatives have created certificates in an attempt to foster the publication of highquality health websites, checklists, and guidelines [3,7,21], the industry still lacks a widely recognized standard. Sun et al extensively reviewed studies that examine the criteria users apply when assessing the information quality of online health information [46].…”