互联网上颈椎退行性病变信息的质量评估。

IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY International Journal of Spine Surgery Pub Date : 2024-03-04 DOI:10.14444/8566
Leo Swee Liang Chong, Mark Zhu, Joseph Frederick Baker
{"title":"互联网上颈椎退行性病变信息的质量评估。","authors":"Leo Swee Liang Chong, Mark Zhu, Joseph Frederick Baker","doi":"10.14444/8566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient education is a key element of spinal surgery informed consent. Patients frequently access health information online, yet this information is unregulated and of variable quality. We aimed to assess the quality of information available on degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) websites with a focus on identifying high-quality information websites.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a Google search using keywords pertaining to DCM. The top 50 websites returned were classified based on their publication source, intended audience, and country of origin. The quality of these websites was assessed using both the DISCERN instrument and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria. We also utilized a novel Myelopathy Information Scoring Tool (MIST) to assess the comprehensiveness, accuracy, and detail of online DCM information.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean DISCERN score was 39.9 out of 80. Only one-quarter of these websites were rated \"good\" or \"excellent\" using DISCERN, and the remaining were rated \"very poor,\" \"poor,\" and \"fair.\" The mean JAMA benchmark score was 1.6 out of 4, with 23 out of 50 websites scoring 0. Evaluation using MIST found a mean score of 25.6 out of 50. Using 30 points as a satisfactory MIST cutoff, 72% of DCM websites were deemed critically deficient and unsatisfactory for comprehensive patient education. Both DISCERN and MIST indicated poorest information pertaining to surgical risks and complications as well as treatment outcomes. Websites such as Orthoinfo.aaos.org and Myelopathy.org provided reliable, trustworthy, and comprehensive patient education.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Information available on almost three-quarters of DCM websites was of poor quality, with information regarding complications and treatment outcomes most deficient. Clinicians should be aware of quality sites where patients may be directed to augment patient education and surgical counseling.</p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11265354/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality Assessment of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Information on the Internet.\",\"authors\":\"Leo Swee Liang Chong, Mark Zhu, Joseph Frederick Baker\",\"doi\":\"10.14444/8566\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient education is a key element of spinal surgery informed consent. Patients frequently access health information online, yet this information is unregulated and of variable quality. We aimed to assess the quality of information available on degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) websites with a focus on identifying high-quality information websites.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a Google search using keywords pertaining to DCM. The top 50 websites returned were classified based on their publication source, intended audience, and country of origin. The quality of these websites was assessed using both the DISCERN instrument and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria. We also utilized a novel Myelopathy Information Scoring Tool (MIST) to assess the comprehensiveness, accuracy, and detail of online DCM information.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean DISCERN score was 39.9 out of 80. Only one-quarter of these websites were rated \\\"good\\\" or \\\"excellent\\\" using DISCERN, and the remaining were rated \\\"very poor,\\\" \\\"poor,\\\" and \\\"fair.\\\" The mean JAMA benchmark score was 1.6 out of 4, with 23 out of 50 websites scoring 0. Evaluation using MIST found a mean score of 25.6 out of 50. Using 30 points as a satisfactory MIST cutoff, 72% of DCM websites were deemed critically deficient and unsatisfactory for comprehensive patient education. Both DISCERN and MIST indicated poorest information pertaining to surgical risks and complications as well as treatment outcomes. Websites such as Orthoinfo.aaos.org and Myelopathy.org provided reliable, trustworthy, and comprehensive patient education.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Information available on almost three-quarters of DCM websites was of poor quality, with information regarding complications and treatment outcomes most deficient. Clinicians should be aware of quality sites where patients may be directed to augment patient education and surgical counseling.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38486,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Spine Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11265354/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Spine Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14444/8566\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14444/8566","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:患者教育是脊柱手术知情同意的关键因素。患者经常在网上获取健康信息,但这些信息不受监管且质量参差不齐。我们旨在评估颈椎退行性脊髓病(DCM)网站的信息质量,重点是识别高质量的信息网站:我们使用与 DCM 相关的关键词在谷歌上进行了搜索。方法:我们使用与 DCM 相关的关键词在谷歌上进行了搜索,并根据其出版来源、目标受众和来源国对返回的前 50 个网站进行了分类。我们使用 DISCERN 工具和《美国医学会杂志》(JAMA)基准标准对这些网站的质量进行了评估。我们还使用了新颖的脊髓病信息评分工具(MIST)来评估在线 DCM 信息的全面性、准确性和详细程度:结果:DISCERN 的平均得分为 39.9 分(满分 80 分)。其中只有四分之一的网站通过 DISCERN 被评为 "良好 "或 "优秀",其余网站被评为 "很差"、"差 "和 "一般"。JAMA 基准评分的平均值为 1.6(满分 4 分),50 个网站中有 23 个网站得分为 0。以 30 分作为令人满意的 MIST 临界值,72% 的 DCM 网站被认为在全面的患者教育方面存在严重缺陷,不能令人满意。DISCERN 和 MIST 均显示,与手术风险和并发症以及治疗效果相关的信息最差。Orthoinfo.aaos.org 和 Myelopathy.org 等网站提供了可靠、可信和全面的患者教育:结论:近四分之三的 DCM 网站提供的信息质量较差,其中有关并发症和治疗效果的信息最为缺乏。临床医生应了解可为患者提供指导的优质网站,以加强患者教育和手术咨询。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Quality Assessment of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Information on the Internet.

Background: Patient education is a key element of spinal surgery informed consent. Patients frequently access health information online, yet this information is unregulated and of variable quality. We aimed to assess the quality of information available on degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) websites with a focus on identifying high-quality information websites.

Methods: We performed a Google search using keywords pertaining to DCM. The top 50 websites returned were classified based on their publication source, intended audience, and country of origin. The quality of these websites was assessed using both the DISCERN instrument and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria. We also utilized a novel Myelopathy Information Scoring Tool (MIST) to assess the comprehensiveness, accuracy, and detail of online DCM information.

Results: The mean DISCERN score was 39.9 out of 80. Only one-quarter of these websites were rated "good" or "excellent" using DISCERN, and the remaining were rated "very poor," "poor," and "fair." The mean JAMA benchmark score was 1.6 out of 4, with 23 out of 50 websites scoring 0. Evaluation using MIST found a mean score of 25.6 out of 50. Using 30 points as a satisfactory MIST cutoff, 72% of DCM websites were deemed critically deficient and unsatisfactory for comprehensive patient education. Both DISCERN and MIST indicated poorest information pertaining to surgical risks and complications as well as treatment outcomes. Websites such as Orthoinfo.aaos.org and Myelopathy.org provided reliable, trustworthy, and comprehensive patient education.

Conclusions: Information available on almost three-quarters of DCM websites was of poor quality, with information regarding complications and treatment outcomes most deficient. Clinicians should be aware of quality sites where patients may be directed to augment patient education and surgical counseling.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
162
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Spine Surgery is the official scientific journal of ISASS, the International Intradiscal Therapy Society, the Pittsburgh Spine Summit, and the Büttner-Janz Spinefoundation, and is an official partner of the Southern Neurosurgical Society. The goal of the International Journal of Spine Surgery is to promote and disseminate online the most up-to-date scientific and clinical research into innovations in motion preservation and new spinal surgery technology, including basic science, biologics, and tissue engineering. The Journal is dedicated to educating spine surgeons worldwide by reporting on the scientific basis, indications, surgical techniques, complications, outcomes, and follow-up data for promising spinal procedures.
期刊最新文献
Beyond the Limits to Become a Leading Force in Global Spine Surgery: Present and Future of Spine Surgery in Asia-Pacific. Comparing ACDF Outcomes by Cervical Spine Level: A Single Center Retrospective Cohort Study. Editorial: Embracing Rasch Analysis for Enhanced Spine Surgery Outcomes-The Outsider's Viewpoint. Editors' Introduction: High-Value Endoscopic Techniques: Integrating Surgeon Skill and Experience in Spine Surgery With Rasch Analysis. Invited Commentary: Rasch Analysis and High-Value Spinal Endoscopy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1