在谷歌搜索引擎上的互联网尿石症健康信息质量

IF 1.8 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Advances in Urology Pub Date : 2016-12-04 DOI:10.1155/2016/8243095
D. Chang, R. Abouassaly, N. Lawrentschuk
{"title":"在谷歌搜索引擎上的互联网尿石症健康信息质量","authors":"D. Chang, R. Abouassaly, N. Lawrentschuk","doi":"10.1155/2016/8243095","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose. To compare the quality of health information on the Internet for keywords related to urolithiasis, to assess for difference in information quality across four main Western languages, and to compare the source of sponsorship in these websites. Methods. Health On the Net (HON) Foundation principles were utilised to determine quality information. Fifteen keywords related to urolithiasis were searched on the Google search engine. The first 150 websites were assessed against the HON principles and the source of sponsorship determined. Results. A total of 8986 websites were analysed. A proportion of HON-accredited websites for individual search terms range between 2.5% and 12.0%. The first 50 websites were more likely to be HON-positive compared to websites 51–100 and 101–150. French websites searched were more likely to be HON-positive whereas German websites were less likely to be HON-positive than English websites. There was no statistically significant difference between the rate of HON-positive English and Spanish websites. The three main website sponsors were from government/educational sources (40.2%), followed by commercial (29.9%) and physician/surgeon sources (18.6%). Conclusions. Health information on most urolithiasis websites was not validated. Nearly one-third of websites in this study have commercial sponsorship. Doctors should recognise the need for more reliable health websites for their patients.","PeriodicalId":7490,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Urology","volume":"2016 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/8243095","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality of Health Information on the Internet for Urolithiasis on the Google Search Engine\",\"authors\":\"D. Chang, R. Abouassaly, N. Lawrentschuk\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2016/8243095\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose. To compare the quality of health information on the Internet for keywords related to urolithiasis, to assess for difference in information quality across four main Western languages, and to compare the source of sponsorship in these websites. Methods. Health On the Net (HON) Foundation principles were utilised to determine quality information. Fifteen keywords related to urolithiasis were searched on the Google search engine. The first 150 websites were assessed against the HON principles and the source of sponsorship determined. Results. A total of 8986 websites were analysed. A proportion of HON-accredited websites for individual search terms range between 2.5% and 12.0%. The first 50 websites were more likely to be HON-positive compared to websites 51–100 and 101–150. French websites searched were more likely to be HON-positive whereas German websites were less likely to be HON-positive than English websites. There was no statistically significant difference between the rate of HON-positive English and Spanish websites. The three main website sponsors were from government/educational sources (40.2%), followed by commercial (29.9%) and physician/surgeon sources (18.6%). Conclusions. Health information on most urolithiasis websites was not validated. Nearly one-third of websites in this study have commercial sponsorship. Doctors should recognise the need for more reliable health websites for their patients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7490,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Urology\",\"volume\":\"2016 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/8243095\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8243095\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8243095","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

目的。比较互联网上与尿石症相关的关键字健康信息的质量,评估四种主要西方语言的信息质量差异,并比较这些网站的赞助来源。方法。利用网上健康(HON)基金会的原则来确定信息的质量。在谷歌搜索引擎上搜索了15个与尿石症相关的关键词。前150个网站已根据“诚信原则”进行评估,并确定赞助来源。结果。共分析了8986个网站。个别搜索词的非牟利网站比例在2.5%至12.0%之间。与51-100和101-150网站相比,前50个网站更有可能是阳性的。法国网站更有可能是阳性的,而德国网站比英语网站更不可能是阳性的。英语和西班牙语网站的非阳性率无统计学差异。三个主要的网站赞助商来自政府/教育机构(40.2%),其次是商业机构(29.9%)和内科/外科医生(18.6%)。结论。大多数尿石症网站上的健康信息没有得到验证。在这项研究中,近三分之一的网站有商业赞助。医生应该认识到需要为他们的病人提供更可靠的健康网站。
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 of Health Information on the Internet for Urolithiasis on the Google Search Engine
Purpose. To compare the quality of health information on the Internet for keywords related to urolithiasis, to assess for difference in information quality across four main Western languages, and to compare the source of sponsorship in these websites. Methods. Health On the Net (HON) Foundation principles were utilised to determine quality information. Fifteen keywords related to urolithiasis were searched on the Google search engine. The first 150 websites were assessed against the HON principles and the source of sponsorship determined. Results. A total of 8986 websites were analysed. A proportion of HON-accredited websites for individual search terms range between 2.5% and 12.0%. The first 50 websites were more likely to be HON-positive compared to websites 51–100 and 101–150. French websites searched were more likely to be HON-positive whereas German websites were less likely to be HON-positive than English websites. There was no statistically significant difference between the rate of HON-positive English and Spanish websites. The three main website sponsors were from government/educational sources (40.2%), followed by commercial (29.9%) and physician/surgeon sources (18.6%). Conclusions. Health information on most urolithiasis websites was not validated. Nearly one-third of websites in this study have commercial sponsorship. Doctors should recognise the need for more reliable health websites for their patients.
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
Advances in Urology
Advances in Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Urology is a peer-reviewed, open access journal that publishes state-of-the-art reviews and original research papers of wide interest in all fields of urology. The journal strives to provide publication of important manuscripts to the widest possible audience worldwide, without the constraints of expensive, hard-to-access, traditional bound journals. Advances in Urology is designed to improve publication access of both well-established urologic scientists and less well-established writers, by allowing interested scientists worldwide to participate fully.
期刊最新文献
Initial Experience of Contact Laser Vaporization of the Prostate (CVP) for Benign Prostate Hyperplasia Patients With Hemorrhagic Risk. Racial Disparities in Clinical Trial Enrollment Among Patients Diagnosed With Prostate Cancer: A Population-Based Cohort of Oncology Practices. A Review of Electronic Early Warning Systems for Acute Kidney Injury. Patient Demographics and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events after Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. Complications and Influential Perioperative Factors Associated with SpaceOAR Hydrogel Placement.
×
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