Table 1.

rMETRIQ Score Questions

Questions	Options
Q1: Does the resource provide enough background information to situate the user?	3—Yes, the resource provides sufficient background information to situate the user and also directs users to other valuable resources related to the topic.
	2—Yes, the resource provides sufficient background information to situate the user.
	1—No, the information presented within the resource cannot be situated within its broader context, but users are directed to resources with this information.
	0—No, the information presented within the resource cannot be situated within its broader context without looking up information independently.
Q2: Does the resource contain an appropriate amount of information for its length?	3—No unnecessary, redundant or missing content, all content was essential.
	2—Some unnecessary, redundant, or missing content, but most content was essential.
	1—Lots of unnecessary redundant or missing content.
	0—Insufficient content.
Q3: Is the resource well written and formatted?	3—The resource is very well written and formatted in a way that optimized and benefits learning.
	2—The resource is reasonably well written and formatted, but aspects of the organization or presentation are distracting or otherwise detrimental to learning.
	1—The resource is somewhat well written and formatted, but could benefit from substantive editing (e.g., grammatical errors are seen or better organized).
	0—The resource is poorly written and/or formatted and should not be a resource for learning.
Q4: Does the resource cite its references?	3—Yes, the references are cited, clearly map to specific statements within the resource, and all statements of fact that are not common knowledge are supported with a reference.
	2—Yes, the references are cited and clearly map to specific statements within the resource, but statements of fact that are not common knowledge are made without the support of a reference.
	1—Yes, there are references listed but they do not map to specific statements within the resource.
	0—No, no references are cited.
Q5: Is it clear who created the resource and do they have any conflicts of interest?	3—Yes, the identity and qualifications of the author are clear and they specify that they have no relevant conflicts of interest.
	2—Yes, the identity and qualifications of the author are clear, but they do not disclose whether they have any conflicts of interest.
	1—Yes, the identity of the author is clear, but they do not list their qualifications or disclose whether they have any conflicts of interest.
	0—No, the author of the resource has significant conflicts of interest or is not clearly identified (e.g., no name or a pseudonym is used).
Q6: Are the editorial and prepublication peer review processes that were used to create the resource clearly outlined?	3—Yes, a clear review process is described on the website and it was clearly applied to the resource.
	2—Yes, a clear review process is described on the website, but it was not clear whether it was applied to the resource.
	1—Yes, a review process is mentioned on the website, but it was not clearly described.
	0—No, it is unclear whether or not the website has a review process or there is no process.
Q7: Is there evidence of postpublication commentary on the resource's content by its users?	3—Yes, a robust discussion of the resource's content has occurred that expands upon the content of the resource.
	2—Yes, some comments have been made on the resource, but a robust discussion about the resource's content has not occurred.
	1—There was a mechanism to leave comments but none had been made.
	0—No, there was no mechanism to leave comments or comments that were present were either unrelated to the post or unprofessional.