Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The Western Journal of Medicine logoLink to The Western Journal of Medicine
. 1999 Jun;170(6):329–332.

Review of published criteria for evaluating health-related websites

Paul Kim 1,2, Thomas R Eng 1,2, Mary Jo Deering 1,2, Andrew Maxfield 1,2
PMCID: PMC1305683  PMID: 18751150

Abstract

•Objective

To review published criteria for specifically evaluating health-related information on the World Wide Web and to identify areas of consensus in evaluation.

•Design

Search of Web sites and peer-reviewed medical journals for explicit criteria for evaluating health-related information on the Web using Medline and Lexis-Nexis databases and the following Internet search engines: Yahoo!, Excite, Altavista, Webcrawler, HotBot, Infoseek, Magellan Internet Guide, and Lycos. Criteria were extracted and grouped into categories.

•Results

Twenty-nine published rating tools and journal articles were identified that had explicit criteria for assessing health-related Web sites. Of the 165 criteria extracted from these tools and articles, 132 (80%) were grouped under 1 of 12 specific categories, and 33 (20%) were grouped as miscellaneous because they lacked specificity or were unique. The most frequently cited criteria were those dealing with the content, design, and aesthetics of a site; disclosure of authors, sponsors, or developers; currency of information (includes frequency of update, freshness, and maintenance of site); authority of source; ease of use; and accessibility and availability.

•Conclusions

Many authors agree on the key criteria for evaluating health-related Web sites and efforts to develop consensus criteria may be helpful. The next step is to identify and assess a clear, simple set of consensus criteria that the general public can understand and use.

Full text

PDF
329

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Coiera E. The Internet's challenge to health care provision. BMJ. 1996 Jan 6;312(7022):3–4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7022.3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Eng T. R., Maxfield A., Patrick K., Deering M. J., Ratzan S. C., Gustafson D. H. Access to health information and support: a public highway or a private road? JAMA. 1998 Oct 21;280(15):1371–1375. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.15.1371. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Impicciatore P., Pandolfini C., Casella N., Bonati M. Reliability of health information for the public on the World Wide Web: systematic survey of advice on managing fever in children at home. BMJ. 1997 Jun 28;314(7098):1875–1879. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7098.1875. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Jadad A. R., Gagliardi A. Rating health information on the Internet: navigating to knowledge or to Babel? JAMA. 1998 Feb 25;279(8):611–614. doi: 10.1001/jama.279.8.611. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Lawrence S, Giles CL. Searching the world wide Web . Science. 1998 Apr 3;280(5360):98–100. doi: 10.1126/science.280.5360.98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Micke M. M. The case of hallucinogenic plants and the Internet. J Sch Health. 1996 Oct;66(8):277–280. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.1996.tb03397.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Patrick K., Robinson T. N., Alemi F., Eng T. R. Policy issues relevant to evaluation of interactive health communication applications. The Science Panel on Interactive Communication and Health. Am J Prev Med. 1999 Jan;16(1):35–42. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Pealer L. N., Dorman S. M. Evaluating health-related Web sites. J Sch Health. 1997 Aug;67(6):232–235. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.1997.tb06311.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Robinson T. N., Patrick K., Eng T. R., Gustafson D. An evidence-based approach to interactive health communication: a challenge to medicine in the information age. Science Panel on Interactive Communication and Health. JAMA. 1998 Oct 14;280(14):1264–1269. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.14.1264. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. 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. 1997 Apr 16;277(15):1244–1245. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Sonnenberg F. A. Health information on the Internet. Opportunities and pitfalls. Arch Intern Med. 1997 Jan 27;157(2):151–152. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Weisbord S. D., Soule J. B., Kimmel P. L. Poison on line--acute renal failure caused by oil of wormwood purchased through the Internet. N Engl J Med. 1997 Sep 18;337(12):825–827. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199709183371205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Wyatt J. C. Commentary: measuring quality and impact of the World Wide Web. BMJ. 1997 Jun 28;314(7098):1879–1881. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7098.1879. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Western Journal of Medicine are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES