An Examination of Scope, Completeness, Credibility, and Readability of Health, Medical, and Nutritional Information on the Internet: A Comparative Study of Wikipedia, WebMD, and the Mayo Clinic Websites

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjd.2015.01.267Get rights and content

Section snippets

Objective

To examine the scope, completeness, credibility, and readability of health, medical and nutritional information found on Wikipedia, WebMD, and Mayo Clinic websites.

Methods

A total of 92 statements, across 9 health categories, were formulated and used to assess the selected websites. Trained raters used a standardized search protocol, electronic logs and the 9-item tool to assess for scope, completeness, credibility, and readability of online material across the 3 websites.

Results

In terms of the scope, answers for 91.3% of the 92 general health statements were available on Wikipedia. WebMD (89.1%) and the Mayo Clinic (81.5%) followed respectively. The Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) was significantly higher for Wikipedia compared to WebMD and the Mayo Clinic websites (p<0.001). The Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) scores were also significantly higher for Wikipedia compared to those for WebMD and the Mayo Clinic websites (p<0.001). Sources supporting the general

Discussion

The study findings demonstrate the importance of aligning information and services for health with the skills and abilities of its recipients. As a result, these findings may be used to improve patient health literacy and consequently reduce health disparities.

Conclusion

As a growing number of people use online sources to obtain health, medical, and nutritional information, it is important that this information be complete, comprehensive in scope, and available at a literacy level that is accessible to the general population.

References (0)

Cited by (0)

View full text