ArticleDigital health
Assessment of online information about osteomyelitis of jaw: An infodemiologic study.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Osteomyelitis is a serious inflammatory disease affecting the bone and bone marrow that requires early recognition and management. As the internet and digital platforms increasingly become the primary sources of health-related information for patients, the quality and readability of online content are critical in influencing patient knowledge and decision-making. Despite this, the reliability and accessibility of osteomyelitis related online content remains insufficiently explored. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the quality and readability of osteomyelitis of the jaw related English websites and to classify them by their institutional affiliation. Methods: A systematic online search was performed using Google search engine. The first 100 search results for 2 different terms were reviewed according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Eligible websites were analyzed using quality assessment tools, including the DISCERN instrument and JAMA benchmarks. Readability was evaluated using (FRES), (FKGL), and SMOG index. Websites were then classified according to their institutional affiliation: commercial, non-profit, medical/dental center, or governmental/university based. Results: Among the 200 websites screened, 27 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Most were affiliated with medical or dental centers, whereas governmental and university websites represented the lowest proportion. The readability analysis showed that most of the content was written at a complex level, exceeding the commonly recommended 6th to 8th grade level of reading. Additionally, more than half of the analyzed websites did not meet JAMA standards, particularly in terms of transparency and disclosure. Conclusion: The study's findings revealed significant limitations in the quality and readability of web-based information addressing osteomyelitis. Considering the expanding dependence of patients on online health resources, healthcare providers and academic organizations should actively contribute to creating and promoting reliable, accessible, and evidence-based digital content. Implementing standardized evaluation instruments, including the DISCERN tool and JAMA benchmarks, can help to enhance both credibility and comprehensibility of online health information for public audiences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.