quality of information Archives - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

  • Original Articles

    Quality Information about Uterine Fibroids on the Internet

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2018;40(9):547-553

    Summary

    Original Articles

    Quality Information about Uterine Fibroids on the Internet

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2018;40(9):547-553

    DOI 10.1055/s-0038-1672163

    Views13

    Abstract

    Objective

    There are no published studies analyzing the quality of the information for lay women on the Internet regarding uterine fibroids. The accuracy of the provided material is also unknown. Thus, we have performed a cross-sectional study with 381 websites in the English and Brazilian Portuguese languages between May and December 2017.

    Methods

    Two investigators performed the analysis, and the Cohen kappa coefficient was calculated to analyze the agreement between them. Search terms (uterine fibroids and derivatives) in the English and Brazilian Portuguese languages were used. The accuracywas analyzed by a 10-itemchecklist created based on the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), National Institutes of Health (NIH) and European Menopause and Andropause Society (EMAS) consensuses about uterine fibroids. The item-test correlation and the intraclass coefficient were performed in the 16 questions from the DISCERN instrument, which was designed to measure the quality of health information on the Internet. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) measurements were performed for the independent variables and the DISCERN/accuracy scores.

    Results

    Google was the most used search engine, and uterine fibroid was the search term that generatedmost of the analyzed material. The median score for accuracy in all websites was 5 out of 10, and the median score of the DISCERN instrument was 38 out of 80. The top-scoring sites in the English language were derived from scientific organizations and federal governments, and they regarded the DISCERN score (The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [ACOG], the Food and Drug Administration [FDA]) and the accuracy criteria (NIH, and FDA). On the other hand, in the Brazilian Portuguese language, the highest scores in both instruments were from magazines or physician’s blogs. The Cronbach α test showed a higher correlation (0.77-0.79) between the sites and DISCERN; however, the item-test correlation varied from 0.39 to 0.56.

    Conclusion

    There is a need to improve the quality of the information regarding uterine fibroids for lay women.

    See more
    Quality Information about Uterine Fibroids on the Internet

Search

Search in:

Article type
abstract
book-review
brief-report
case-report
correction
editorial
letter
other
rapid-communication
research-article
review-article
Section
Arigos Originais
Article
Artigo de Revisão
Original Articles
Carta ao Editor
Carta ao Editor
Cartas
Case Report
Case Reports
Caso e Tratamento
Clinical Consensus Recommendation
Corrigendum
Editoriais
Editorial
Equipamentos e Métodos
Errata
Erratas
Erratum
FEBRASGO POSITION STATEMENT
Febrasgo Statement
Febrasgo Statement Position
FIGO Statement
GUIDELINES
Integrative Review
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Métodos e Técnicas
Nota do Editor
Nota Prévia
Original Article
Original Article/Contraception
Original Article/Infertility
Original Article/Obstetrics
Original Article/Oncology
Original Article/Sexual Violence/Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
Original Article/Teaching and Training
Original Articles
Relato de Caso
Relato de Casos
Relatos de Casos
Reply to the Letter to the Editor
Resposta dos Autores
Resumo De Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Teses
Resumos dos Trabalhos Premiados no 50º Congresso Brasileiro de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revisão
Short Communication
Special Article
Systematic Review
Técnica e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Métodos
Trabalhos Originais
Year / Volume
2024; v.46
2023; v.45
2022; v.44
2021; v.43
2020; v.42
2019; v.41
2018; v.40
2017; v.39
2016; v.38
2015; v.37
2014; v.36
2013; v.35
2012; v.34
2011; v.33
2010; v.32
2009; v.31
2008; v.30
2007; v.29
2006; v.28
2005; v.27
2004; v.26
2003; v.25
2002; v.24
2001; v.23
2000; v.22
1999; v.21
1998; v.20
ISSUE