Quality/Credibility of eHealth Information and Trust Issues

I thought people might find the article below quite useful. 

Koren Hyogene Kwag, Marien González-Lorenzo, Rita Banzi, Stefanos Bonovas, Lorenzo Moja
J Med Internet Res 2016 (Jan 19); 18(1):e15
HTML (open access): http://www.jmir.org/2016/1/e15/
PDF (members only): http://www.jmir.org/2016/1/e15/PDF  

Background: The complexity of modern practice requires health professionals to be active information-seekers. Objective: Our aim was to review the quality and progress of point-of-care information summaries—Web-based medical compendia that are specifically designed to deliver pre-digested, rapidly accessible, comprehensive, and periodically updated information to health care providers. We aimed to evaluate product claims of being evidence-based. Methods: We updated our previous evaluations by searching Medline, Google, librarian association websites, and conference proceedings from August 2012 to December 2014. We included Web-based, regularly updated point-of-care information summaries with claims of being evidence-based. We extracted data on the general characteristics and content presentation of products, and we quantitatively assessed their breadth of disease coverage, editorial quality, and evidence-based methodology. We assessed potential relationships between these dimensions and compared them with our 2008 assessment. Results: We screened 58 products; 26 met our inclusion criteria. Nearly a quarter (6/26, 23%) were newly identified in 2014. We accessed and analyzed 23 products for content presentation and quantitative dimensions. Most summaries were developed by major publishers in the United States and the United Kingdom; no products derived from low- and middle-income countries. The main target audience remained physicians, although nurses and physiotherapists were increasingly represented. Best Practice, Dynamed, and UptoDate scored the highest across all dimensions. The majority of products did not excel across all dimensions: we found only a moderate positive correlation between editorial quality and evidence-based methodology (r=.41, P=.0496). However, all dimensions improved from 2008: editorial quality (P=.01), evidence-based methodology (P=.015), and volume of diseases and medical conditions (P<.001). Conclusions: Medical and scientific publishers are investing substantial resources towards the development and maintenance of point-of-care summaries. The number of these products has increased since 2008 along with their quality. Best Practice, Dynamed, and UptoDate scored the highest across all dimensions, while others that were marketed as evidence-based were less reliable. Individuals and institutions should regularly assess the value of point-of-care summaries as their quality changes rapidly over time.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Free e-journal access for UCL Alumni

Image
In  partnership with UCL Library Services, the Development and Alumni Relations Office can now offer UCL alumni free access to thousands of online academic journals. To start using the digital libraries, please click on the links below and enter your Alumni Web Community (AWC) log-in and password when prompted.  Information about the terms and conditions of use can be found online, together with the answers to frequently asked questions . JSTOR JSTOR hosts back issues of more than 2,000 academic journals from the social sciences, humanities and sciences. Back issues are defined by JSTOR as those published more than five years ago. Sage Sage's portfolio contains more than 750 journals spanning the humanities, social sciences, science, technology and medicine.    Project Muse   Project Muse provides access to 500 journals across the   humanities a...
Read more

Child Death Review Study

This report has been published by the Confidential Enquiry into Maternal and Child Health (CEMACH). It is the first report of a national confidential enquiry specifically focussed on child deaths. There were six key findings: Key Finding 1: The feasibility of confidential enquiries in children: CEMACH recommended that it should prepare a strategy for the future development of the national confidential enquiry for child health in liaison with the National Patient Safety Agency, the Department of Health, the Department for Children, Schools and Families and other relevant bodies. Key Finding 2: Good practice: The CEMACH enquiry panels found many examples of high quality care and examples where, even with outstanding care, the child died Key Finding 3: The recognition of serious illness in children: CEMACH recommended (for paediatric care in hospitals) a standardised and rational monitoring system with imbedded early identification systems for children developing critical illness – an...
Read more

Wellbeing rooms at GOS ICH

Image
For students and staff looking for a moment of calm from their studies or working day may be interested to know that last summer the EDI team introduced two new spaces to be the GOS ICH community. There are two wellbeing rooms, situated on the ground floor of the Philip Ullman Wing, where you can pray, meditate or reflect. It’s also a place for those who are looking for a calm space to take a bit of time out.  Room G0.1 is intended for multi-faith prayer and religious observance, and as a quiet space. Room G0.02 is a dedicated quiet space for wellbeing activities such as meditation, mindfulness practise, quiet reading, or for organised wellbeing activities (except on Fridays between 12:30pm and 2:30pm when it is reserved for prayer). To get to the rooms, cross the small bridge just outside Kennedy Lecture Theatre, and then go through the 2 sets of doors opposite Seminar Room 3 (which is just behind you), the rooms are on your left. To respect other users, please familiarise your...
Read more