{"title":"医院获得性感染的风险因素和控制:维基百科与科学文献的比较","authors":"E. Allara","doi":"10.2427/8744","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: nowadays Wikipedia is one of the main on-line sources of general information. It contains several items about nosocomial infections and their prevention, together of items on virtually every scientific topic. \nThis study aims to assess whether Wikipedia can be considered a reliable source for professional updating, concerning Healthcare-associated Infections (HAI). \nMethods: Wikipedia has been searched in order to gather items on HAI. 387 items were found with a search string. The field of research was reduced at those articles (27 items) containing exhaustive information in relation to prevention of HAI. The messages contained in those articles were than compared with the recommendations of a selected guideline (NICE 2003), completed by a literature search, with the aim of testing their reliability and exhaustivity. \nResults: 15 Wiki items were found and 51 messages selected. NICE guidelines contained 119 recommendations and 52 more recommendations has been found in a further literature search. 45.1% of Wikipedia’s messages were even found in the guidelines. On this percentage, 21.6% completely agreed with the messages of the guidelines, 15.7% partially agreed, 3.9% disagreed and 3.9% showed different level of evidence in different articles. Moreover, 54.9% of Wikipedia’s messages were not included in the guidelines and 84.2% of the recommendations contained in the guidelines were not present in Wikipedia. \nConclusions: Wikipedia should not be considered as a reliable source for professional updating on HAI.","PeriodicalId":45811,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology Biostatistics and Public Health","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk factors and control of hospital acquired infections: a comparison between Wikipedia and scientific literature\",\"authors\":\"E. Allara\",\"doi\":\"10.2427/8744\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: nowadays Wikipedia is one of the main on-line sources of general information. It contains several items about nosocomial infections and their prevention, together of items on virtually every scientific topic. \\nThis study aims to assess whether Wikipedia can be considered a reliable source for professional updating, concerning Healthcare-associated Infections (HAI). \\nMethods: Wikipedia has been searched in order to gather items on HAI. 387 items were found with a search string. The field of research was reduced at those articles (27 items) containing exhaustive information in relation to prevention of HAI. The messages contained in those articles were than compared with the recommendations of a selected guideline (NICE 2003), completed by a literature search, with the aim of testing their reliability and exhaustivity. \\nResults: 15 Wiki items were found and 51 messages selected. NICE guidelines contained 119 recommendations and 52 more recommendations has been found in a further literature search. 45.1% of Wikipedia’s messages were even found in the guidelines. On this percentage, 21.6% completely agreed with the messages of the guidelines, 15.7% partially agreed, 3.9% disagreed and 3.9% showed different level of evidence in different articles. Moreover, 54.9% of Wikipedia’s messages were not included in the guidelines and 84.2% of the recommendations contained in the guidelines were not present in Wikipedia. \\nConclusions: Wikipedia should not be considered as a reliable source for professional updating on HAI.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiology Biostatistics and Public Health\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiology Biostatistics and Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2427/8744\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology Biostatistics and Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2427/8744","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
Risk factors and control of hospital acquired infections: a comparison between Wikipedia and scientific literature
Background: nowadays Wikipedia is one of the main on-line sources of general information. It contains several items about nosocomial infections and their prevention, together of items on virtually every scientific topic.
This study aims to assess whether Wikipedia can be considered a reliable source for professional updating, concerning Healthcare-associated Infections (HAI).
Methods: Wikipedia has been searched in order to gather items on HAI. 387 items were found with a search string. The field of research was reduced at those articles (27 items) containing exhaustive information in relation to prevention of HAI. The messages contained in those articles were than compared with the recommendations of a selected guideline (NICE 2003), completed by a literature search, with the aim of testing their reliability and exhaustivity.
Results: 15 Wiki items were found and 51 messages selected. NICE guidelines contained 119 recommendations and 52 more recommendations has been found in a further literature search. 45.1% of Wikipedia’s messages were even found in the guidelines. On this percentage, 21.6% completely agreed with the messages of the guidelines, 15.7% partially agreed, 3.9% disagreed and 3.9% showed different level of evidence in different articles. Moreover, 54.9% of Wikipedia’s messages were not included in the guidelines and 84.2% of the recommendations contained in the guidelines were not present in Wikipedia.
Conclusions: Wikipedia should not be considered as a reliable source for professional updating on HAI.
期刊介绍:
Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Public Health (EBPH) is a multidisciplinary journal that has two broad aims: -To support the international public health community with publications on health service research, health care management, health policy, and health economics. -To strengthen the evidences on effective preventive interventions. -To advance public health methods, including biostatistics and epidemiology. EBPH welcomes submissions on all public health issues (including topics like eHealth, big data, personalized prevention, epidemiology and risk factors of chronic and infectious diseases); on basic and applied research in epidemiology; and in biostatistics methodology. Primary studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses are all welcome, as are research protocols for observational and experimental studies. EBPH aims to be a cross-discipline, international forum for scientific integration and evidence-based policymaking, combining the methodological aspects of epidemiology, biostatistics, and public health research with their practical applications.