Skip to main content
. 2020 Jan 24;22(1):e14725. doi: 10.2196/14725

Table 2.

Modified Quality Evaluation Scoring Tool website quality criteria and scores. For categorical variables with items that were mutually exclusive, a single P value was obtained from chi-square test. P values for the Quality Evaluation Scoring Tool score were based on Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

Criteria All included websites Nonmanufacturers or nonretailers
Baidu (N=50), n (%) Google (N=50), n (%) P value Baidu (N=17), n (%) Google (N=35), n (%) P value
Authorship

.008

.13

No indication of authorship 44 (88) 33 (66)
12 (71) 18 (51)

All other indications of authorship 6 (12) 10 (20)
5 (29) 10 (29)

Author/qualification clearly stated 0 (0) 7 (14)
0 (0%) 7 (20)
Attribution—a

<.001

<.001

No sources 28 (56) 9 (18)
10 (59) 0 (0)

Mention of expert source and research findings, but insufficiently 20 (40) 14 (28)
7 (41) 12 (34)

Reference to at least one identifiable scientific study 2 (4) 10 (20)
0 (0) 6 (17)

Reference to mainly identifiable scientific studies 0 (0) 17 (34)
0 (0) 17 (49)
Attribution—b

<.001

.001

Not available; in vitro, animal, and editorials 46 (92) 23 (46)
15 (88) 14 (40)

Single journal article 3 (6) 2 (4)
2 (12) 1 (3)

Multiple journal articles 1 (2) 15 (30)
0 (0) 13 (37)

Systematic reviews of studies 0 (0) 10 (20)
0 (0) 7 (20)
Conflicts of interest

<.001

<.001

High risk of conflict of interest 27 (54) 15 (30)
5 (29) 1 (3)

Unclear risk of conflict of interest 23 (46) 15 (30)
12 (71) 14 (40)

Unbiased information 0 (0) 20 (40)
0 (0) 20 (57)
Currency

.001

.006

No date present 7 (14) 25 (50)
0 (0) 12 (34)

Dated but 1 year old or older 7 (14) 3 (6)
0 (0) 3 (9)

Dated within the last 1 year 36 (72) 22 (44)
17 (100) 20 (57)
Tone of claims

<.001

<.001

Fully supported 36 (72) 12 (24)
14 (82) 3 (9)

Mainly supported 13 (26) 17 (34)
3 (18) 12 (34)

Balanced/cautious support 1 (2) 21 (42)
0 (0) 20 (57)