CROSS SECTIONAL ANALYSIS OF SCOLIOSIS- SPECIFIC ...€¦ · results (cont’d) cross sectional analysis of scoliosis-specific information on th e internet: are patients being misinformed?

C R O S S S E C T I O N A L A N A LY S I S O F S C O L I O S I S - S P E C I F I C I N F O R M AT I O N O N T H E I N T E R N E T

David Truumees; Ashley Duncan, MBA, RN; Kano Mayer, MD; Devender Singh, PhD; Matthew Geck, MD; Eeric Truumees, MD

ARE PATIENTS BEING MISINFORMED?

Ascension Texas Spine and Scoliosis CenterAustin, Texas United States

DISCLOSURESDavid Truumees: None

Ashley Duncan, MBA, RN: None

Kano Mayer, MD: Indiago (b), Lanai Health Solutions (b), IOPIP (b)

Devender Singh, PhD: None

Matthew Geck, MD: Diffusion (b); Seton Brain and Spine institute, Spine Hope (c), Spine and Scoliosis Research Foundation (c); Genesys (d)

Eeric Truumees, MD: Globus (a); Doctors research group(b); NASS (c); Stryker spine (d); Stryker spine (e)

a.Grants/Research Support

b.Stock/Shareholder

c.Board Membership

d.Royalties

e.Patent

CROSS SECTIONAL ANALYSIS OF SCOLIOSIS-SPECIFIC INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET: ARE PATIENTS BEING MISINFORMED?

PRESENTATION CONTENT

Results

Conclusions

Study Design

Methods

Background

Purpose


BACKGROUND


• The internet is one of the leading sources patients turn to for health and medical information

• Low-quality information can negatively impact the physician-patient dynamic1

• Previous studies have demonstrated that not only is most of online health information unreliable, it is often presented at a reading level well above the general public standard2,3

• Adolescence is the primary age of scoliosis diagnosis. This current generation has always had technology readily available, and therefore are nine times more likely to seek information on the internet first4

PURPOSEIn our study, we aimed to not only evaluate the accuracy of scoliosis-specific content from the most widely used search engines, but also to assess the readability of the content and the level of distraction caused by the host source. Both critical factors in health care literacy and retention.


Accuracy

Low Distraction Readability

STUDY DESIGN: CROSS SECTIONAL ANALYSIS


METHODS: Independent searches were conducted across three search engines for the keyword “scoliosis”.

The top 30 sites from each search were then analyzed for the following:

Accuracy

• Authorship• ± HONcode• DISCERN• JAMA• SSQC

Readability

• Flesch Reading Ease

• Flesch-Kincaid reading level

Distraction

• Validated distraction index (number of clicks to read article, ads, pop-ups, cookies, ease of navigation)

RESULTS


Search Term“Scoliosis”

Yahoo number of hits-

13,500,000

Google number of hits-

10,700,000

Bingnumber of hits-

13,500,000

Top 30 websites selected



48 Excluded sites:

-Duplicate=46-Inaccessible=1-Sites closed=1

42 of 90 unique websites evaluated

RESULTS (CONT’D)


Average readability was at a 12th grade reading level

OVERALL

Academic, 31%

Health News Outlet, 29%

Healthcare System, 21%

Unspecified, 19%

WEBSITE CATEGORIES

More than 90% of sites were “mobile friendly”

RESULTS (CONT’D)


ACCURACY• ~71% of sites were not HONcode certified• Certified sites were associated with higher DISCERN and JAMA scores• Uncertified sites had higher scoliosis-specific content scores

HEALTH NEWS OUTLETS:

• Health News Outlets had the highest rate of HONcode certification• Highest DISCERN and JAMA scores

ACADEMIC SITES: Highest scoliosis-specific content score (SSQC)

RESULTS (CONT’D)


READABILITYHONcode certified sites were associated with better readability (written at lower grade level, higher ease of reading)

Health News Outlets were written on a lower grade level and had highest ease of reading scores

Academic sites were the most difficult to read, being written at over a 12th grade level and a reading ease score of 35.9 ±15.9 (overall average: 11.8 ±0.8 grade level, 40.4 ±3.5 reading ease score), but highest rate of physician authorship


RESULTS (CONT’D)

DISTRACTION INDEX

2.1

1

2.1

1

2.1

1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Health new

s outlet

Academ

ic

Health new

s outlet

Healthcare system

Health new

s outlet

Unspecified

Mean Distraction Index*

RESULTS (CONT’D)


HONcode: Health on the net code; JAMA: Journal of American Medical Association

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an increase in the numbers of sites, the quality and accuracy of the information remains questionable.


For the iGeneration and their care-givers, the internet remains the most popular source of health-related and medical information.

As clinicians, we should not only help develop high quality sites with more accurate information, but also direct patients to verifiable sites with regulated information.

REFERENCES

1. Allam A, Schulz PJ, Krauthammer M. Toward automated assessment of health Web page quality using the DISCERN instrument. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. May 2016:481-487. doi:10.1093/jamia/ocw140.

2. Daraz L, Morrow AS, Ponce OJ, et al. Readability of Online Health Information: A Meta-Narrative Systematic Review. American Journal of Medical Quality. 2018;33(5):487-492. doi:10.1177/1062860617751639.

3. Daraz L, Morrow AS, Ponce OJ, et al. Can Patients Trust Online Health Information? A Meta-narrative Systematic Review Addressing the Quality of Health Information on the Internet. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2019;34(9):1884-1891. doi:10.1007/s11606-019-05109-0.

4. Hesse BW, Nelson DE, Kreps GL, et al. Trust and Sources of Health Information. Archives of Internal Medicine. 2005;165(22):2618-2624. doi:10.1001/archinte.165.22.2618.


THANK YOU


Documents

CROSS SECTIONAL ANALYSIS OF SCOLIOSIS- SPECIFIC ...€¦ · results (cont’d) cross sectional analysis of scoliosis-specific information on th e internet: are patients being misinformed?