Volume 21, Issue 74 (1-2019)
jha 2019, 21(74): 65-74 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Zeinali V, Haghparast A, Damerchilou M, Vazifehshenas N. Quality and readability of online health information produced by the Ministry of Health and Medical Education of Iran. jha 2019; 21 (74) :65-74
URL: http://jha.iums.ac.ir/article-1-2798-en.html
URL: http://jha.iums.ac.ir/article-1-2798-en.html
1- Shahid Beheshti university of medical sciences, Tehran, Iran , v.zeinali4183@sbmu.ac.ir
2- Shahid Beheshti university of medical sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Shahid Beheshti university of medical sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (5244 Views)
Introduction: The Ministry of Health and Medical Education is one of the main providers of health information for patients and caregivers in Iran. The current study aimed to assess the quality and readability of online health information produced by the Ministry and its affiliated organizations.
Methods: In this descriptive-survey study, the websites of the Ministry of Health and its affiliated medical universities (N=48) were assessed during April to July 2018. The corpus included 10780 records; however, only 7164 records produced for patient education were included in the study. Finally, a sample of 215 records were randomly selected and reviewed by two researchers. The quality and readability of the records were assessed by DISCERN questionnaire and Flash Dayani formula, respectively.
Result: The mean scores for the quality (M=41.14) and readability (M= 35.27) of health information indicated a moderate quality and low readability. The highest mean scores on information quality (M= 49.50) and health information readability (M= 54.28) were obtained by Tabriz and Shahid Beheshti Universities of Medical Sciences, in that order.
Conclusion: The quality of online health information produced by the Ministry of Health in Iran ranges from poor to moderate and it is written at difficult level; therefore, it is recommended to consider international standards for the content of patient education packages prior to developing any educational packages.
Methods: In this descriptive-survey study, the websites of the Ministry of Health and its affiliated medical universities (N=48) were assessed during April to July 2018. The corpus included 10780 records; however, only 7164 records produced for patient education were included in the study. Finally, a sample of 215 records were randomly selected and reviewed by two researchers. The quality and readability of the records were assessed by DISCERN questionnaire and Flash Dayani formula, respectively.
Result: The mean scores for the quality (M=41.14) and readability (M= 35.27) of health information indicated a moderate quality and low readability. The highest mean scores on information quality (M= 49.50) and health information readability (M= 54.28) were obtained by Tabriz and Shahid Beheshti Universities of Medical Sciences, in that order.
Conclusion: The quality of online health information produced by the Ministry of Health in Iran ranges from poor to moderate and it is written at difficult level; therefore, it is recommended to consider international standards for the content of patient education packages prior to developing any educational packages.
Type of Study: Research |
Received: 2018/08/25 | Accepted: 2019/01/23 | Published: 2019/01/23
Received: 2018/08/25 | Accepted: 2019/01/23 | Published: 2019/01/23
References
1. The online health care revolution: Pew internet and American life project; 2000 [cited 2018 Sep 2]; Available from: http://www.pewinternet.org/2000/11/26/the-online-health-care-revolution/.
2. Neter E, Brainin E. eHealth literacy: Extending the digital divide to the realm of health information. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2012;14(1): e19 [DOI:10.2196/jmir.1619]
3. Bhandari S, Kapoor A. Catching the e-healthcare bug, webchutney digital healthcare report 2011 [cited 2018 Sep 2]; Available from: https://www.slideshare.net/sidharthrao/webchutney-digital-healthcare-report-2011.
4. Alsaiari A, Joury A, Aljuaid M, Wazzan M, Pines JM. The content and quality of health information on the internet for patients and families on adult kidney cancer. Journal of Cancer Education. 2017;32(4):878-84. [DOI:10.1007/s13187-016-1039-9]
5. Lam CG, Roter DL, Cohen KJ. Survey of quality, readability, and social reach of websites on osteosarcoma in adolescents. Patient Education and Counseling. 2013;90(1):82-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.pec.2012.08.006]
6. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa E-R. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: A systematic review. JAMA. 2002;287(20):2691-700. [DOI:10.1001/jama.287.20.2691]
7. Yeung TM, Sacchi M, Mortensen NJ, Spinelli A. Assessment of the quality of patient-orientated information on surgery for Crohn's disease on the internet. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. 2015;58(9):857-61. [DOI:10.1097/DCR.0000000000000424]
8. McKearney TC, McKearney RM. The quality and accuracy of internet information on the subject of ear tubes. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 2013;77(6):894-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijporl.2013.03.021]
9. Khosravi A, Mousavinejad S, Borazjani F, Basirian Jahromi R. Assessment of readability levels of persian diet and nutrition websites. journal of Library and Information Research. 2017;7(1):322-34. [In Persian]
10. Ahmadzadeh Z, Ahmadzadeh K. Assessing the readability level of patient educational resources distributed in Shiraz health centers by Flesch Dayani formula. Journal of Modern Medical Information Sciences. 2015;1(2):62-9. [In Persian]
11. Chang MY, Kim J-W, Rhee C-S. The quality of health information on allergic rhinitis, rhinitis, and sinusitis available on the internet. Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research. 2015;7(2):141-7. [DOI:10.4168/aair.2015.7.2.141]
12. Hirasawa R, Saito K, Yachi Y, Ibe Y, Kodama S, Asumi M, et al. Quality of internet information related to the mediterranean diet. Public Health Nutrition. 2012;15(5):885-93. [DOI:10.1017/S1368980011002345]
13. Delli K, Livas C, Spijkervet F, Vissink A. Internet information on xerostomia: What should patients expect? Oral Diseases. 2015;21(1):83-9. [DOI:10.1111/odi.12213]
14. Hendrick PA, Ahmed OH, Bankier SS, Chan TJ, Crawford SA, Ryder CR, et al. Acute low back pain information online: An evaluation of quality, content accuracy and readability of related websites. Manual Therapy. 2012;17(4):318-24. [DOI:10.1016/j.math.2012.02.019]
15. Joury A, Joraid A, Alqahtani F, Alghamdi A, Batwa A, Pines J. The variation in quality and content of patient‐focused health information on the Internet for otitis media. Child: Care, Health and Development. 2018;44(2):221-6. [DOI:10.1111/cch.12524]
16. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R. DISCERN: An instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. 1999;53(2):105-11. [DOI:10.1136/jech.53.2.105]
17. Dayani MH. Three formula to determine the readability level of written especially novice literates. Journal of Educational Sciences. 1996; (3-4):59-80. [In Persian]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Site Keywords
Health, Administration, Scientific Article, Iran University of Medical Sciences,
