使用JAMA基准和HONcode密封评估互联网信息的质量和可靠性

IF 0.1 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of Oral Health and Oral Epidemiology Pub Date : 2022-10-04 DOI:10.34172/johoe.2022.05
B. Kuter
{"title":"使用JAMA基准和HONcode密封评估互联网信息的质量和可靠性","authors":"B. Kuter","doi":"10.34172/johoe.2022.05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The internet is an important tool; however, there are concerns about the quality and reliability of medical information available online. This study aimed to evaluate the quality and reliability of internet information on fissure sealants with different toolkits. Methods: This study was conducted by searching the internet using the Google search engine with questions about fissure sealants. The first thirty websites in search results for each question were evaluated. Videos, duplicate websites, and advertisements were excluded. A total of 270 websites were evaluated by the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmark and Health on the Net Code of Conduct (HONcode) certification. Results: The results revealed that 35.1% of the websites met JAMA authorship criteria, 19.3% met JAMA attribution criteria, 42.1% met JAMA disclosure criteria, and 19.3% of websites met JAMA currency criteria. The websites from the United States and Australian websites showed the highest JAMA authorship criteria scores, respectively. Moreover, 8.8% of websites met HONcode criteria. One information, two government, and two organization websites met the criteria of this certification. None of the private clinic websites met HONcode criteria. Conclusion: This study showed that the quality and the reliability of web-based information on fissure sealants in pediatric patients are generally inadequate. Both physicians and website editors should be careful and attentive when sharing information on the Internet.","PeriodicalId":41793,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral Health and Oral Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the quality and reliability of internet information on fissure sealants using JAMA benchmark and HONcode seal\",\"authors\":\"B. Kuter\",\"doi\":\"10.34172/johoe.2022.05\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The internet is an important tool; however, there are concerns about the quality and reliability of medical information available online. This study aimed to evaluate the quality and reliability of internet information on fissure sealants with different toolkits. Methods: This study was conducted by searching the internet using the Google search engine with questions about fissure sealants. The first thirty websites in search results for each question were evaluated. Videos, duplicate websites, and advertisements were excluded. A total of 270 websites were evaluated by the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmark and Health on the Net Code of Conduct (HONcode) certification. Results: The results revealed that 35.1% of the websites met JAMA authorship criteria, 19.3% met JAMA attribution criteria, 42.1% met JAMA disclosure criteria, and 19.3% of websites met JAMA currency criteria. The websites from the United States and Australian websites showed the highest JAMA authorship criteria scores, respectively. Moreover, 8.8% of websites met HONcode criteria. One information, two government, and two organization websites met the criteria of this certification. None of the private clinic websites met HONcode criteria. Conclusion: This study showed that the quality and the reliability of web-based information on fissure sealants in pediatric patients are generally inadequate. Both physicians and website editors should be careful and attentive when sharing information on the Internet.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41793,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Oral Health and Oral Epidemiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Oral Health and Oral Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34172/johoe.2022.05\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oral Health and Oral Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/johoe.2022.05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:互联网是一个重要的工具;然而,人们对在线医疗信息的质量和可靠性表示担忧。本研究旨在评估不同工具包的互联网裂缝密封剂信息的质量和可靠性。方法:本研究使用谷歌搜索引擎在互联网上搜索有关裂隙封闭剂的问题。对每个问题的搜索结果中的前三十个网站进行了评估。视频、重复网站和广告被排除在外。共有270个网站接受了《美国医学会杂志》基准和《网络健康行为准则》认证的评估。结果:结果显示,35.1%的网站符合《美国医学会杂志》作者标准,19.3%的网站符合“美国医学会期刊归因标准”,42.1%的网站满足“美国医学协会期刊披露标准”,19.3%网站符合“《美国医学协会杂志货币标准”。美国和澳大利亚网站的《美国医学会杂志》作者标准得分最高。此外,8.8%的网站符合HONcode标准。一个信息、两个政府和两个组织网站符合本认证标准。没有一家私人诊所网站符合HONcode标准。结论:本研究表明,基于网络的儿童裂隙封闭剂信息的质量和可靠性普遍不足。医生和网站编辑在互联网上分享信息时都应该小心谨慎。
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
Evaluation of the quality and reliability of internet information on fissure sealants using JAMA benchmark and HONcode seal
Background: The internet is an important tool; however, there are concerns about the quality and reliability of medical information available online. This study aimed to evaluate the quality and reliability of internet information on fissure sealants with different toolkits. Methods: This study was conducted by searching the internet using the Google search engine with questions about fissure sealants. The first thirty websites in search results for each question were evaluated. Videos, duplicate websites, and advertisements were excluded. A total of 270 websites were evaluated by the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmark and Health on the Net Code of Conduct (HONcode) certification. Results: The results revealed that 35.1% of the websites met JAMA authorship criteria, 19.3% met JAMA attribution criteria, 42.1% met JAMA disclosure criteria, and 19.3% of websites met JAMA currency criteria. The websites from the United States and Australian websites showed the highest JAMA authorship criteria scores, respectively. Moreover, 8.8% of websites met HONcode criteria. One information, two government, and two organization websites met the criteria of this certification. None of the private clinic websites met HONcode criteria. Conclusion: This study showed that the quality and the reliability of web-based information on fissure sealants in pediatric patients are generally inadequate. Both physicians and website editors should be careful and attentive when sharing information on the Internet.
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
Journal of Oral Health and Oral Epidemiology
Journal of Oral Health and Oral Epidemiology DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
自引率
25.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Clinical symptoms of COVID-19 among tobacco users in Moradabad city, India: A retrospective observational study Awareness and practice of oral complications due to diabetes mellitus among diabetes patients at Chengalpattu district, India: A cross-sectional study The necessity of a comprehensive response to the number and composition of oral healthcare teams in Iran using the system dynamics approach Prevalence of tongue lesions in a population of Iranian schoolchildren in 2020 A scoping review of knowledge, attitudes, and clinical practices of dental professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic
×
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