Introduction
Gallstone disease affects approximately 6% of the global population. Adequate knowledge about gallstone disease among the public can facilitate early medical consultation and enable them to navigate healthcare pathways effectively. In the digital age, patients increasingly turn to the internet for health-related information, with over half of the global population relying on it for access to knowledge.
Aims & Methods
This study aimed to evaluate the quality, readability, usability, and reliability of patient-oriented websites providing information on gallstone disease, using validated assessment tools. The three most widely used search engines, Google, Yahoo, and Bing were searched employing keywords related to gallstone disease. The first 50 search results per keyword per engine were screened. Applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 52 websites were selected for detailed analysis. The information was assessed for readability using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), for usability and reliability using the LIDA tool, and for overall quality using the DISCERN instrument. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS (v27), with significance set at p < 0.05.
Results
Among the 52 websites analyzed, only sixteen (30.8%) sites had obtained Health on the Net (HON) code certification. The median FRES score of the included websites was 60.5 out of 100 (range: 33-79.6), indicating readability appropriate for readers aged 13–15 years. The median LIDA usability and reliability scores were 40 out of 54 (range: 31–54) and 24.5 out of 51 (range: 10–51), respectively. The median DISCERN score was 69.8 out of 80 (range: 30-80) with 5.8% (n=3) of websites scoring below 50%. A low DISCERN score (≤ 50%) was found in three (5.8%) websites. The DISCERN score was found to be significantly associated with LIDA reliability and LIDA overall scores (p < 0.001), government run websites (p= 0.028) and HON code certification (p = 0.01). However, no significant association was found between DISCERN scores and LIDA usability or FRES. Most websites (86.5%) provided accurate clinical information, but only 76.9% discussed treatment complications.
Conclusion
The quality of online patient information on gallstone disease varied considerably, with only a minority meeting optimal standards for readability and certification. While clinical accuracy was generally satisfactory, gaps remain in presenting treatment risks and maintaining content currency. These findings emphasize the need for improved oversight and standardization of online health content to support patient education and informed decision-making.
References
1. Internet World Stats. Internet world stats: Usage and population statistics, http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm (2013, accessed 16 June 2023).
2. Lee JS, Seo HS, Hong TH. YouTube as a source of patient information on gallstone disease. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20: 4066–4070.
3. Raptis DA, Sinanyan M, Ghani S, et al. Quality assessment of patient information on the management of gallstone disease in the internet. HPB 2019; 21: 1632–1640.
4. European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines on the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of gallstones. J Hepatol 2016; 65: 146–181.
Disclosure
There is no conflict of interest
