Quality of Patient Education Sections on Otitis Media Across Different Website Platforms

Abstract

Objective: To determine the quality, content, and readability of patient education materials pertaining to otitis media across several popular online platforms focused on otolaryngology and pediatric primary care education. Methods: Online patient materials related to otitis media and directed toward parents were collected from the American Association for Family Practice (AAFP), ENT-Health section of the American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, Healthychildren.org from the American Academy of Pediatrics, KidsHealth from Nemours, WebMD, and Wikipedia. Materials were analyzed for quality, content, and readability. The DISCERN instrument was used to score quality. A unique content score was generated based on the information provided on each website and on the medical and surgical management of otitis media. Readability scores were calculated using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease Score, Gunning-Fog Index, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, Coleman-Liau Index, and Automated Readability Index. Results: Overall, content was well-balanced. Information from AAFP and Healthychildren.org was focused more on medical management than other sources. The average DISCERN scores showed all sources to be of good quality with minimal shortcomings. The AAFP and KidsHealth websites had some readability scores around the 8th-grade reading level, the National Institute of Health’s upper limit recommended for public health information; however, most websites were above this recommended reading level. Conclusion: Patient education materials related to otitis media on academic and certain popular internet sites are good sources to obtain high-quality information on the topic. Patient educational background, prior knowledge and understanding of otitis media, and physician-patient partnership goals should be taken into account when referring patients to online materials.

Multidimensional Feature Classification of the Health Information Needs of Patients With Hypertension in an Online Health Community Through Analysis of 1000 Patient Question Records: Observational Study

“…Through this study, we hope to strengthen patient participation with the help of internet technology for improving the personalized characteristics of existing patient education. Patient engagement in their care plays an important role in improving health outcomes [40]. With patient participation, patient education can provide detailed information about drugs, symptoms and signs, tests and examinations, demographic data, diseases, risk factors, emotions, lifestyles, and other information identified in the consultation records for each patient in real time.…”

Readability of English, German, and Russian Disease-Related Wikipedia Pages: Automated Computational Analysis

“…Previous studies have investigated readability for a relatively small sample of disease- or health-related English Wikipedia pages [ 10 , 18 , 19 , 34 - 36 ]. All studies consistently found that these are difficult to read and require at least a college degree or higher level of education.…”

“…Although Wikipedia is a popular resource for accessing medical knowledge [ 10 , 17 ], its readability is not assessed, quality assured, or controlled before publishing. This can lead to articles being difficult to read and understand [ 10 , 18 , 19 ], which can result in a lack of comprehensibility and an inability to help patients bridge the health literacy gap [ 20 , 21 ].…”

“…Before this study, we conducted a systematic literature review to assess how readability metrics have been used to evaluate health-related Wikipedia articles. The details of the review are included in Multimedia Appendix 1 [ 10 , 11 , 17 - 19 , 34 - 46 ]. In total, 31 articles were closely evaluated.…”

“…In 2020, Shetty et al [ 19 ] conducted a search for patient education material available on the web regarding otitis media . The authors then assessed the readability of 6 selected websites, including Wikipedia, with 24 patient education pages.…”