| 42.6% |
55.3% |
1. Clear structure and organization of content. |
| 77.8% |
93.3% |
2. Easy navigation, “user-friendliness.” |
| 87% |
93.3% |
3. Information relevance and coherence: congruence between key word search and output. |
| 35.2% |
40% |
4. Scientific rigor: adequate citations. In non-scientific sites, explicit mention of the fact that the site’s content does not replace the advice of a health professional. |
| 40.7% |
40% |
5. Covers a wide scope on the subject and presents an accurate and comprehensive message. |
| 96.3% |
100% |
6. Message clarity and comprehensibility. Use of understandable language. |
| 35.2% |
33.3% |
7. Updated information, maintenance of site, mention of last content review date. |
| 79.6% |
93.3% |
8. Presence of advertising and sponsor links on the site: clarity and transparency of such links, properly distinguished from the rest of the content. |
| 55.6% |
46.7% |
9. Mention of the author/s and their qualifications. Includes author / institution contact details and address. |
| 25.9% |
26.7% |
10. Scientific Association accreditations. |
| 5.6% |
13.3% |
11. Accreditation certificate or trust mark (HON, WMA, WIS, PWMC or others). |
| 42.6% |
66.7% |
12. Clear statement of bibliographical sources. Reliable references for specialists cited. |
