JRSM > Volume 100, Number 10 > Pp. 473-477

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Send a Quick Comment Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Quick Comments are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rennie, C. A Articles by Kang, C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Age-related macular degeneration: what do patients find on the internet?

Christina A Rennie¹ Shabeeba Hannan¹ Nick Maycock¹   Chee Kang²

¹ Southampton Eye Unit, Mailpoint 104, Southampton General Hospital, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK
² Queen Alexandra Hospital, Cosham, Portsmouth, PO6 3LY, UK

Correspondence to: Christina A Rennie Email: chris_rennie{at}yahoo.com

Objective To assess the quality of information and readability of the top internet sites for age-related macular degeneration (AMD).

Design An examination of the technical information provision, quality and readability of websites found during an internet search for ‘age-related macular degeneration’.

Setting Six internet search engines were used to find 26 unique sites on AMD.

Main outcome measures Technical information and quality were assessed using a simple grading system. Readability was assessed using a Simple Measure Of Gobbledygook (SMOG) rating.

Results Twelve organizational, seven academic and seven commercial sites were identified. The average technical scores were 82.3%, 67.9% and 65.2% for each type of site, respectively (P=0.097, one way ANOVA). The average quality scores were 62.2%, 62.6%, and 49.5% for each type of site, respectively (P=0.356, one-way ANOVA). The average SMOG ratings were 16.3, 16.1, and 16.2 for each type of site, respectively (P=0.983, one-way ANOVA). Fifteen of the sites provided details of new and emerging treatments, with seven providing a detailed discussion.

Conclusions Many websites are now meeting the challenge of providing comprehensive information about AMD and its new treatments. Quality scores were disappointing, with sites needing to provide more evidence of authorship and attribution of information. The majority of sites had SMOG scores above 10, making them difficult for the average person to understand. As physicians we need to help design and direct patients to sites that provide high quality, current information.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. S Donnelly, R. L Shaw, and O. B. van den Akker eHealth as a challenge to 'expert' power: a focus group study of internet use for health information and management J R Soc Med, October 1, 2008; 101(10): 501 - 506. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]