Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Gunther Eysenbach

Publications and source records attributed to Gunther Eysenbach.

28 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2003

Societal dimensions of third-party evaluation of Internet health content.

Rating and certification of Internet health content have been suggested as strategies to guide citizens to high quality information. Attempts to rate Internet content, however, have been criticised for being unfeasible or undesirable. We created and tested a novel concept and technology to evaluate online health resources. In this paper, we view various societal issues and suggest solutions whenever possible. Rating and certification of Internet content should be preceded by a consideration and discussion that has many societal dimensions.

Access to Information↗
PubMed2002

How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews.

OBJECTIVES: To describe techniques for retrieval and appraisal used by consumers when they search for health information on the internet. DESIGN: Qualitative study using focus groups, naturalistic observation of consumers searching the world wide web in a usability laboratory, and in-depth interviews. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 21 users of the internet participated in three focus group sessions. 17 participants were given a series of health questions and observed in a usability laboratory setting while retrieving health information from the web; this was followed by in-depth interviews. SETTING: Heidelberg, Germany. RESULTS: Although their search technique was often suboptimal, internet users successfully found health information to answer questions in an average of 5 minutes 42 seconds (median 4 minutes 18 seconds) per question. Participants in focus groups said that when assessing the credibility of a website they primarily looked for the source, a professional design, a scientific or official touch, language, and ease of use. However, in the observational study, no participants checked any "about us" sections of websites, disclaimers, or disclosure statements. In the post-search interviews, it emerged that very few participants had noticed and remembered which websites they had retrieved information from. CONCLUSIONS: Further observational studies are needed to design and evaluate educational and technological innovations for guiding consumers to high quality health information on the web.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review.

CONTEXT: The quality of consumer health information on the World Wide Web is an important issue for medicine, but to date no systematic and comprehensive synthesis of the methods and evidence has been performed. OBJECTIVES: To establish a methodological framework on how quality on the Web is evaluated in practice, to determine the heterogeneity of the results and conclusions, and to compare the methodological rigor of these studies, to determine to what extent the conclusions depend on the methodology used, and to suggest future directions for research. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE and PREMEDLINE (1966 through September 2001), Science Citation Index (1997 through September 2001), Social Sciences Citation Index (1997 through September 2001), Arts and Humanities Citation Index (1997 through September 2001), LISA (1969 through July 2001), CINAHL (1982 through July 2001), PsychINFO (1988 through September 2001), EMBASE (1988 through June 2001), and SIGLE (1980 through June 2001). We also conducted hand searches, general Internet searches, and a personal bibliographic database search. STUDY SELECTION: We included published and unpublished empirical studies in any language in which investigators searched the Web systematically for specific health information, evaluated the quality of Web sites or pages, and reported quantitative results. We screened 7830 citations and retrieved 170 potentially eligible full articles. A total of 79 distinct studies met the inclusion criteria, evaluating 5941 health Web sites and 1329 Web pages, and reporting 408 evaluation results for 86 different quality criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics, medical domains, search strategies used, methods and criteria of quality assessment, results (percentage of sites or pages rated as inadequate pertaining to a quality criterion), and quality and rigor of study methods and reporting. DATA SYNTHESIS: Most frequently used quality criteria used include accuracy, completeness, readability, design, disclosures, and references provided. Fifty-five studies (70%) concluded that quality is a problem on the Web, 17 (22%) remained neutral, and 7 studies (9%) came to a positive conclusion. Positive studies scored significantly lower in search (P =.02) and evaluation (P =.04) methods. CONCLUSIONS: Due to differences in study methods and rigor, quality criteria, study population, and topic chosen, study results and conclusions on health-related Web sites vary widely. Operational definitions of quality criteria are needed.

Evaluation Studies as Topic↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Using the Internet for surveys and health research.

This paper concerns the use of the Internet in the research process, from identifying research issues through qualitative research, through using the Web for surveys and clinical trials, to pre-publishing and publishing research results. Material published on the Internet may be a valuable resource for researchers desiring to understand people and the social and cultural contexts within which they live outside of experimental settings, with due emphasis on the interpretations, experiences, and views of 'real world' people. Reviews of information posted by consumers on the Internet may help to identify health beliefs, common topics, motives, information, and emotional needs of patients, and point to areas where research is needed. The Internet can further be used for survey research. Internet-based surveys may be conducted by means of interactive interviews or by questionnaires designed for self-completion. Electronic one-to-one interviews can be conducted via e-mail or using chat rooms. Questionnaires can be administered by e-mail (e.g. using mailing lists), by posting to newsgroups, and on the Web using fill-in forms. In "open" web-based surveys, selection bias occurs due to the non-representative nature of the Internet population, and (more importantly) through self-selection of participants, i.e. the non-representative nature of respondents, also called the 'volunteer effect'. A synopsis of important techniques and tips for implementing Web-based surveys is given. Ethical issues involved in any type of online research are discussed. Internet addresses for finding methods and protocols are provided. The Web is also being used to assist in the identification and conduction of clinical trials. For example, the web can be used by researchers doing a systematic review who are looking for unpublished trials. Finally, the web is used for two distinct types of electronic publication. Type 1 publication is unrefereed publication of protocols or work in progress (a 'post-publication' peer review process may take place), whereas Type 2 publication is peer-reviewed and will ordinarily take place in online journals.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMedDate not supplied

SARS and population health technology.

The recent global outbreak of SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) provides an opportunity to study the use and impact of public health informatics and population health technology to detect and fight a global epidemic. Population health technology is the umbrella term for technology applications that have a population focus and the potential to improve public health. This includes the Internet, but also other technologies such as wireless devices, mobile phones, smart appliances, or smart homes. In the context of an outbreak or bioterrorism attack, such technologies may help to gather intelligence and detect diseases early, and communicate and exchange information electronically worldwide. Some of the technologies brought forward during the SARS epidemic may have been primarily motivated by marketing efforts, or were more directed towards reassuring people that "something is being done," ie, fighting an "epidemic of fear." To understand "fear epidemiology" is important because early warning systems monitoring data from a large number of people may not be able to discriminate between a biological epidemic and an epidemic of fear. The need for critical evaluation of all of these technologies is stressed.

Communicable Diseases↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The impact of the Internet on cancer outcomes.

Each day, more than 12.5 million health-related computer searches are conducted on the World Wide Web. Based on a meta-analysis of 24 published surveys, the author estimates that in the developed world, about 39% of persons with cancer are using the Internet, and approximately 2.3 million persons living with cancer worldwide are online. In addition, 15% to 20% of persons with cancer use the Internet "indirectly" through family and friends. Based on a comprehensive review of the literature, the available evidence on how persons with cancer are using the Internet and the effect of Internet use on persons with cancer is summarized. The author distinguishes four areas of Internet use: communication (electronic mail), community (virtual support groups), content (health information on the World Wide Web), and e-commerce. A conceptual framework summarizing the factors involved in a possible link between Internet use and cancer outcomes is presented, and future areas for research are highlighted.

Commerce↗