A Systematic Quality Assessment of Online Resources on Keratoconus using the Modified Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (mEQIP).

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Antonio Cartabellotta, Andrea Taloni, Ginevra Giovanna Adamo, Marco Pellegrini, Vincenzo Scorcia, Marco Mura, Giuseppe Giannaccare
{"title":"A Systematic Quality Assessment of Online Resources on Keratoconus using the Modified Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (mEQIP).","authors":"Antonio Cartabellotta, Andrea Taloni, Ginevra Giovanna Adamo, Marco Pellegrini, Vincenzo Scorcia, Marco Mura, Giuseppe Giannaccare","doi":"10.1159/ore/aedag008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To systematically rate the quality of online educational websites focused on keratoconus.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Google, Yahoo and Bing were queried for the keywords \"Keratoconus\", \"Keratoconus treatment\", \"Keratoconus surgery\". For each keyword, the first 50 websites were assessed for quality of information using the Modified Ensuring Quality Information for Patient (mEQIP) scale. English websites intended for non-professional public were included while forums, blogs and scientific articles were excluded. Websites with a score above the 75th percentile were labelled as high-score, while those below were classified as low-score. Statistically significant values were considered if p < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 119 eligible websites were included and classified in 5 groups based on their source: healthcare portals (n=36, 30.25%), practitioners (n=48, 40.34%), hospitals (n=21, 17.65%), professional societies (n=13, 10.92%) and encyclopedias (n=1, 0.84%). The mean mEQIP score was 20.03 ŷ 4.13. Websites with a score of 23 or higher were labelled as high score, websites below 23 were classified as low score. High-score websites (27.73%) provided more comprehensive details about treatments, medical procedures, benefits, and risks, and were supported by scientific references. Conversely, low-score websites (72.27%) often lacked essential information and quantitative data. There was no significant difference in the quality of information for webpages published before and after COVID-19 pandemic (P = .79), or between different types of sources (P = .80).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, this study indicates moderate quality of online information regarding keratoconus and underscores the need for improvements of online health resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":19662,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic Research","volume":" ","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/ore/aedag008","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: To systematically rate the quality of online educational websites focused on keratoconus.

Methods: Google, Yahoo and Bing were queried for the keywords "Keratoconus", "Keratoconus treatment", "Keratoconus surgery". For each keyword, the first 50 websites were assessed for quality of information using the Modified Ensuring Quality Information for Patient (mEQIP) scale. English websites intended for non-professional public were included while forums, blogs and scientific articles were excluded. Websites with a score above the 75th percentile were labelled as high-score, while those below were classified as low-score. Statistically significant values were considered if p < 0.05.

Results: Overall, 119 eligible websites were included and classified in 5 groups based on their source: healthcare portals (n=36, 30.25%), practitioners (n=48, 40.34%), hospitals (n=21, 17.65%), professional societies (n=13, 10.92%) and encyclopedias (n=1, 0.84%). The mean mEQIP score was 20.03 ŷ 4.13. Websites with a score of 23 or higher were labelled as high score, websites below 23 were classified as low score. High-score websites (27.73%) provided more comprehensive details about treatments, medical procedures, benefits, and risks, and were supported by scientific references. Conversely, low-score websites (72.27%) often lacked essential information and quantitative data. There was no significant difference in the quality of information for webpages published before and after COVID-19 pandemic (P = .79), or between different types of sources (P = .80).

Conclusions: Overall, this study indicates moderate quality of online information regarding keratoconus and underscores the need for improvements of online health resources.

使用改进的患者质量保证信息(mEQIP)对圆锥角膜在线资源进行系统质量评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ophthalmic Research
Ophthalmic Research 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
4.80%
发文量
75
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ''Ophthalmic Research'' features original papers and reviews reporting on translational and clinical studies. Authors from throughout the world cover research topics on every field in connection with physical, physiologic, pharmacological, biochemical and molecular biological aspects of ophthalmology. This journal also aims to provide a record of international clinical research for both researchers and clinicians in ophthalmology. Finally, the transfer of information from fundamental research to clinical research and clinical practice is particularly welcome.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书