Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: A cross-sectional survey assessing the quality of information on the Internet

Meade, Maurice J

doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2021.08.029

Cited by 10 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A surprising finding, however, was that only one of the assessed websites originated in the United States. This differs with comparable studies in which the United States, the ‘home’ of the largest number of English‐language users of the Internet in the world, was the source of most health information websites 3,4,6,13,14 . This might illustrate the view of some commentators that the United States involvement in acceptance and researching the condition has been sub‐optimal 23…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…No website displayed the seal in the present study. The presence of the seal has been found to be limited in similar studies investigating a wide range of oral conditions and treatment modalities 5,6,12,13 . The lack of awareness regarding the seal’s existence among website publishers, healthcare professionals and the public might help to explain its absence in the assessed websites in the surveyed websites 12 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Potential scores range from 1 to 100 with higher scores signifying greater ease in reading the material. The scores can be equated to the readability expected of individuals at different levels of education 6 . A score ≥70 has been recommended as an appropriate readability level for health information 22 …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The public is increasingly accessing the Internet for health‐related information. This has become more pronounced since the onset of the COVID‐19 pandemic during which direct patient/clinician interaction has been adversely affected 6,7 . The Internet, however, is unregulated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is likely to result in patients and their families being able to understand and act upon any presented health information 12 . The quality and readability of online information related to many oral conditions, appliances and treatments, has, however, been generally found to be deficient 3,5,6,12–14 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The quality and readability of online molar incisor hypomineralization patient education materials: a systematic analysis

Meade

Dreyer

2022

Australian Dental Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Molar incisor hypomineralization (MIH) is estimated to affect 14% of children worldwide. It is crucial that patients and their families have access to easily comprehensible and reliable MIH‐relevant information. This study aims to determine the quality, reliability and readability of online patient education materials about MIH. Methods A systematic search strategy was adopted. Five validated tools were used to assess the content of the 21 websites that satisfied inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data analyses were applied via GraphPad Prism software version 9 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). Results Five (23.8%) websites only satisfied the criteria for understandability and two (9.5%) websites satisfied the criteria for actionability using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). No website contained the Health on the Net (HON)Code Seal and the mean (SD) Journal of the American Medical Association number of benchmarks per website was 1.33/4 (1.02). All websites failed to reach recommended minimum readability levels. Higher PEMAT scores were associated with ‘easier’ readability. Conclusions Online patient education materials related to MIH are lacking in quality and reliability, and are too difficult for most to read easily. The authors of MIH‐related online content should consider reference to quality of information tools when developing patient education materials.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%