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
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.