Available web-based dental implants information for patients. How good is it?

Background Massive use of the Internet for health issues has raised concerns about the quality of the information available and about consumers' ability to tell “good” from “bad” information. Purpose To assess the quality of patient‐addressed, dental implants‐related websites in terms of reliab...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical oral implants research 2015-11, Vol.26 (11), p.1276-1280
Main Authors: Leira-Feijoo, Yago, Ledesma-Ludi, Yanina, Seoane-Romero, Juan M., Blanco-Carrión, Juan, Seoane, Juan, Varela-Centelles, Pablo
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Comprehension
Consumer Health Information
Dental Implants
Dentistry
health literacy
Humans
Internet
Search Engine
Web Browser
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Massive use of the Internet for health issues has raised concerns about the quality of the information available and about consumers' ability to tell “good” from “bad” information. Purpose To assess the quality of patient‐addressed, dental implants‐related websites in terms of reliability, accessibility, usability and readability. Materials and Methods Two search engines (Google and Yahoo) were used in this study. The first 100 sites, as listed by each engine, were considered for the study. Each site was categorised and analysed for quality using the DISCERN and the LIDA instruments. The Flesch‐Kinkaid Reading Grade Level (FKRGL) and the Flesh Reading Ease Score (FRES) were used to assess legibility. Results After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 32 single websites entered the study. The median score for the DISCERN instrument (3 [2–3]) indicated serious or potentially important shortcoming in the quality of the information obtained. LIDA scores showed modest percentages for accessibility (79.36 [74.60–85.31]) and intermediate for usability (59.20 (50.46‐68.51)) and reliability (55.55 [45.37–66.66]). Legibility indices reached scores within the range of difficult to read (FRES = 51.72 [38.70–55.27]); FKRGL = 12.76 [10.07–14.87]). Conclusions Available e‐health information on dental implants in English language is difficult to read for the average patient and poor in terms of quality.
ISSN:0905-7161
1600-0501
DOI:10.1111/clr.12451