Methods for evaluating the quality of information on health websites: Systematic Review (2001-2014)

Author:

Paolucci Rodolfo,Neto André Pereira

Abstract

The Internet is a major source of health information, but the poor quality of the information has been criticized for decades. We looked at methods for assessing the quality of health information, updating the findings of the first systematic review from 2002. We searched 9 Health Sciences, Information Sciences, and multidisciplinary databases for studies. We identified 7,718 studies and included 299. Annual publications increased from 9 (2001) to 53 (2013), with 89% from developed countries. We identified 20 areas of knowledge. Six tools have been used worldwide, but 43% of the studies did not use any of them. The methodological framework of criteria from the first review has been the same. The authors were the evaluators in 80% of the studies. This field of evaluation is expanding. No instrument simultaneously covers the evaluation criteria. There is still a need for a methodology involving experts and users and evidence-based indicators of accuracy.

Publisher

South Florida Publishing LLC

Subject

General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3