Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop and test the reliability of a tool for rating websites that provide information on evidence-based medicine. DESIGN: For each site, 60% of the score was given for content (eight criteria) and 40% was given for organization and presentation (nine criteria). Five of 10 randomly selected sites met the inclusion criteria and were used by three observers to test the accuracy of the tool. Each site was rated twice by each observer, with a 3-week interval between ratings. SETTING: Laval University, Quebec city. PARTICIPANTS: Three observers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to rate the reliability of the tool. RESULTS: Average overall scores for the five sites were 40%, 79%, 83%, 88%, and 89%. All three observers rated the same two sites in fourth and fifth place and gave the top three ratings to the other three sites. The overall rating of the five sites by the three observers yielded an ICC of 0.93 to 0.97. An ICC of 0.87 was obtained for the two overall ratings conducted 3 weeks apart. CONCLUSION: This new tool offers excellent intraobserver and interobserver measurement reliability and is an excellent means of distinguishing between medical websites of varying quality. For best results, we recommend that the tool be used simultaneously by two observers and that differences be resolved by consensus.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (390.4 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Eysenbach G., Sa E. R., Diepgen T. L. Cybermedicine. Interview by Clare Thompson. BMJ. 1999 Nov 13;319(7220):1294–1294. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7220.1294. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 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]
- Kim P., Eng T. R., Deering M. J., Maxfield A. Published criteria for evaluating health related web sites: review. BMJ. 1999 Mar 6;318(7184):647–649. doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7184.647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sackett D. L., Rosenberg W. M., Gray J. A., Haynes R. B., Richardson W. S. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996 Jan 13;312(7023):71–72. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Winker M. A., Flanagin A., Chi-Lum B., White J., Andrews K., Kennett R. L., DeAngelis C. D., Musacchio R. A. Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet: principles governing AMA web sites. American Medical Association. JAMA. 2000 Mar 22;283(12):1600–1606. doi: 10.1001/jama.283.12.1600. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]