2005, 2004, English, Image edition: Efficacy of Quality Criteria to Identify Potentially Harmful Information: A Cross-sectional Survey of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Web Sites Walji, Muhammad; Sagaram, Smitha; Sagaram, Deepak; ...

User activity

Send to:
 
Bookmark: http://trove.nla.gov.au/version/38174606
Physical Description
  • 89039 bytes, 153302 bytes, 125 bytes, 6817 bytes, text/​html, text/​xml, image/​gif, application/​octet-stream
Published
  • Gunther Eysenbach; Centre for Global eHealth Innovation, Toronto, Canada
  • 2005-12-22T18:57:27Z
  • 2004-06-29
Language
  • English

Edition details

Title
  • Efficacy of Quality Criteria to Identify Potentially Harmful Information: A Cross-sectional Survey of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Web Sites
Creator
  • Walji, Muhammad
  • Sagaram, Smitha
  • Sagaram, Deepak
  • Meric-Bernstam, Funda
  • Johnson, Craig
  • Mirza, Nadeem Q
  • Bernstam, Elmer V
Published
  • Gunther Eysenbach; Centre for Global eHealth Innovation, Toronto, Canada
  • 2005-12-22T18:57:27Z
  • 2004-06-29
Physical Description
  • 89039 bytes, 153302 bytes, 125 bytes, 6817 bytes, text/​html, text/​xml, image/​gif, application/​octet-stream
Subjects
Notes
  • Reviewer: Bhavnani, Suresh
  • Reviewer: Seidman, Joshua
  • Reviewer: Fogel, Joshua
  • [This item is a preserved copy and is not necessarily the most recent version. To view the current item, visit http:/​/​www.jmir.org/​2004/​2/​e21/​ ] Background: Many users search the Internet for answers to health questions. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is a particularly common search topic. Because many CAM therapies do not require a clinician's prescription, false or misleading CAM information may be more dangerous than information about traditional therapies. Many quality criteria have been suggested to filter out potentially harmful online health information. However, assessing the accuracy of CAM information is uniquely challenging since CAM is generally not supported by conventional literature. Objective: The purpose of this study is to determine whether domain-independent technical quality criteria can identify potentially harmful online CAM content. Methods: We analyzed 150 Web sites retrieved from a search for the three most popular herbs: ginseng, ginkgo and St. John's wort and their purported uses on the ten most commonly used search engines. The presence of technical quality criteria as well as potentially harmful statements (commissions) and vital information that should have been mentioned (omissions) was recorded. Results: Thirty-eight sites (25%) contained statements that could lead to direct physical harm if acted upon. One hundred forty five sites (97%) had omitted information. We found no relationship between technical quality criteria and potentially harmful information. Conclusions: Current technical quality criteria do not identify potentially harmful CAM information online. Consumers should be warned to use other means of validation or to trust only known sites. Quality criteria that consider the uniqueness of CAM must be developed and validated.
  • Sagaram S. Fieschi M, Coeira E, Li YC, editors. Inter-observer agreement for quality measures applied to online health information. Medinfo IOS Press; Amsterdam. 2004.
  • Fallis Don, Frické Martin. Indicators of accuracy of consumer health information on the Internet: a study of indicators relating to information for managing fever in children in the home. J Am Med Inform Assoc Jan 2002. Vol. 9(1) p. 73-9.
  • Griffiths K M, Christensen H. Quality of web based information on treatment of depression: cross sectional survey. BMJ Dec 16, 2000. Vol. 321(7275) p. 1511-5. URL: http:/​/​bmj.bmjjournals.com/​cgi/​content/​full/​321/​7275/​1511
  • Martin-facklam Meret, Kostrzewa Michael, Schubert Falk, Gasse Christiane, Haefeli Walter E. Quality markers of drug information on the Internet: an evaluation of sites about St. John's wort. Am J Med Dec 15, 2002. Vol. 113(9) p. 740-5.
  • National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, National Institutes of Health. What is complementary and alternative medicine (CAM)?. 2002. URL: http:/​/​nccam.nih.gov/​health/​whatiscam/​ [accessed 2004 Jun 24]
  • Eisenberg D M, Kessler R C, Van Rompay M I, Kaptchuk T J, Wilkey S A, Appel S, Davis R B. Perceptions about complementary therapies relative to conventional therapies among adults who use both: results from a national survey. Ann Intern Med Sep 4, 2001. Vol. 135(5) p. 344-51. URL: http:/​/​www.annals.org/​cgi/​pmidlookup?view=​reprint&​pmid=​11529698
  • Fox S, Rainie L. Vital decisions: how Internet users decide what information to trust when they or their loved ones are sick. Pew Internet & American Life Project May 22, 2002. URL: http:/​/​www.pewinternet.org/​pdfs/​PIP_Vital_Decisions_May2002.pdf
  • Sagaram Smitha, Walji Muhammad, Bernstam Elmer. Evaluating the prevalence, content and readability of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) web pages on the internet. Proc AMIA Symp 2002. p. 672-6.
  • Morris Charles A, Avorn Jerry. Internet marketing of herbal products. JAMA Sep 17, 2003. Vol. 290(11) p. 1505-9.
  • Ernst E, Schmidt K. 'Alternative' cancer cures via the Internet?. Br J Cancer Aug 27, 2002. Vol. 87(5) p. 479-80.
  • Risk Ahmad, Petersen Carolyn. Health information on the internet: quality issues and international initiatives. JAMA 2002. Vol. 287(20) p. 2713-5.
  • Meric Funda, Bernstam Elmer V, Mirza Nadeem Q, Hunt Kelly K, Ames Frederick C, Ross Merrick I, Kuerer Henry M, Pollock Raphael E, Musen Mark A, Singletary S Eva. Breast cancer on the world wide web: cross sectional survey of quality of information and popularity of websites. BMJ Mar 9, 2002. Vol. 324(7337) p. 577-81. URL: http:/​/​bmj.bmjjournals.com/​cgi/​content/​full/​324/​7337/​577
  • Eysenbach Gunther, Köhler Christian. Does the internet harm health? Database of adverse events related to the internet has been set up. BMJ Jan 26, 2002. Vol. 324(7331) p. 239.
  • Sullivan DE. Nielsen netratings search engine ratings. URL: http:/​/​searchenginewatch.com/​reports/​netratings.html [accessed 2003 Feb 7]
  • Most popular herbs and supplements in the United States. URL: http:/​/​yoga.about.com/​library/​weekly/​aa022501a.htm [accessed 2004 Jun 24]
  • Health Improvement Institute. HIIQA definitions and abbreviations. URL: http:/​/​www.hii.org/​343definitions.htm [accessed 2004 Jun 24]
  • HTTrack. URL: http:/​/​HTTrack.com/​ [accessed 2004 Jun 24]
  • Eysenbach Gunther, Powell John, Kuss Oliver, Sa Eun-Ryoung. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA 2002. Vol. 287(20) p. 2691-700.
  • Medical Economics Company. PDR for Herbal Medicines. Medical Economics Company; Montvale, NJ. 2000. URL: http:/​/​dsc.ucsf.edu/​view_pdf.php?pdf_id=​23
  • Sloan Kettering AboutHerbs website. URL: http:/​/​www.mskcc.org/​aboutherbs [accessed 2003 Apr 25]
  • Berland G K, Elliott M N, Morales L S, Algazy J I, Kravitz R L, Broder M S, Kanouse D E, Muñoz J A, Puyol J A, Lara M, Watkins K E, Yang H, Mcglynn E A. Health information on the Internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA 2001. Vol. 285(20) p. 2612-21.
  • Markman Maurie. Safety issues in using complementary and alternative medicine. J Clin Oncol Sep 15, 2002. Vol. 20(18 Suppl) p. 39S-41S. URL: http:/​/​www.jco.org/​cgi/​content/​full/​20/​suppl_1/​39s
  • Commission of the European Communities, Brussels. eEurope 2002: Quality Criteria for Health Related Websites. J Med Internet Res Nov 29, 2002. Vol. 4(3) p. e15. URL: http:/​/​www.jmir.org/​2002/​3/​e15/​
  • Byrt T, Bishop J, Carlin J B. Bias, prevalence and kappa. J Clin Epidemiol May 1993. Vol. 46(5) p. 423-9.
  • Adler S R, Fosket J R. Disclosing complementary and alternative medicine use in the medical encounter: a qualitative study in women with breast cancer. J Fam Pract Jun 1999. Vol. 48(6) p. 453-8.
  • Cooke Alison, Gray Lisa. Evaluating the quality of internet-based information about alternative therapies: development of the BIOME guidelines. J Public Health Med Dec 2002. Vol. 24(4) p. 261-7.
  • Silberg W M, Lundberg G D, Musacchio R A. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor--Let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA Apr 16, 1997. Vol. 277(15) p. 1244-5.
  • doi:10.2196/​jmir.6.2.e21
  • Muhammad Walji, Smitha Sagaram, Deepak Sagaram, Funda Meric-Bernstam, Craig Johnson, Nadeem Q Mirza, Elmer V Bernstam. Efficacy of Quality Criteria to Identify Potentially Harmful Information: A Cross-sectional Survey of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Web Sites. J Med Internet Res 2004;6(2):e21 <URL: http:/​/​www.jmir.org/​2004/​2/​e21/​>
  • 1438-8871
Terms of Use
Language
  • English
Contributed by
OAIster

Get this edition

  • Set up My libraries

    How do I set up "My libraries"?

    In order to set up a list of libraries that you have access to, you must first login or sign up. Then set up a personal list of libraries from your profile page by clicking on your user name at the top right of any screen.

  • All (1)
  • Unknown (1)
None of your libraries hold this item.
None of your libraries hold this item.
None of your libraries hold this item.
None of your libraries hold this item.
None of your libraries hold this item.
None of your libraries hold this item.
None of your libraries hold this item.
None of your libraries hold this item.

User activity


e.g. test cricket, Perth (WA), "Parkes, Henry"

Separate different tags with a comma. To include a comma in your tag, surround the tag with double quotes.

Be the first to add a tag for this edition

Be the first to add this to a list

Comments and reviews

What are comments? Add a comment

No user comments or reviews for this version

Add a comment