Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Research/BestWork

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How do Wiki Project Medicine's best disease related article compare with those from professional sources?

Comparison to be performed by

[edit]

We will need a group of independent experts with no vested interests in any of the sources being examined to rate the quality based on a structured format. If we are able to find a suitable rigorous structure format for analysis medical article quality we might be able to use less formal experts.

Method of comparison

[edit]

As of 2002 there does not appear to be "operational definitions of quality criteria"[1][2] The AHRQ published 7 criteria to judge web health content in 1999 [1] A 2007 article describes some tool used to assess quality.[3] Discern appears to be one potential tool.[2] There is also a shorter version.[4] It may be applied by none experts.[5] It along with Health On the Net Foundation however have their limitations (not very sensitive).[6]

A number of papers from 2008 used a few more scoring systems on top of the discern.[7][8][9] These appear to require those who are using them to have some expertise in the subject matter. Wikipedia I am sure was contained within the analysis just is not mentioned by name. Have queried the author about this. This article by him gives Wikipedia a 6th place for clinical depression scoring ahead of the patient information part of Uptodate.[10]

Another tool is the "LIDA instrument" [3] which was used in this paper.[11] And a few more techniques are touched on in this review.[12]

Summary

What it comes down to is we need a "gold" standard to which to compare our sources. This may be a formal quality assessment tool or a subject matter expert. The assessment tool will probably be the easiest and least expensive of the two main methods.

Articles to be compared

[edit]

Wiki Project Medicine has 63 featured article [4] 29 of which relate to diseases and are thus more suitable for comparison. While some have claimed that Wikipedia's content is of lower quality compared to other sources (and much of it certainly is). How does its best content compare? Which if drawn to its conclusion and Wikipedia reaches it full potential (all content is featured) what sort of source would Wikipedia be.

Number of articles

[edit]

Would be great to do 25 articles. If it takes 2 hours for each and each is reviewed by two people that takes us to 125 hours of work ( assuming two comparitors )

Sources to which we will compare

[edit]

Uptodate, Emedicine, current undergraduate textbook chapter of similar scope, others?

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Eysenbach, G; Powell, J; Kuss, O; Sa, ER (May 22–29, 2002). "Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review". JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association. 287 (20): 2691–700. PMID 12020305.
  2. ^ Kim, P; Eng, TR; Deering, MJ; Maxfield, A (Mar 6, 1999). "Published criteria for evaluating health related web sites: review". BMJ (Clinical research ed.). 318 (7184): 647–9. PMID 10066209.
  3. ^ Hanif, F; Read, JC; Goodacre, JA; Chaudhry, A; Gibbs, P (Dec 2009). "The role of quality tools in assessing reliability of the internet for health information". Informatics for health & social care. 34 (4): 231–43. PMID 19919300.
  4. ^ Khazaal, Y; Chatton, A; Cochand, S; Coquard, O; Fernandez, S; Khan, R; Billieux, J; Zullino, D (Oct 2009). "Brief DISCERN, six questions for the evaluation of evidence-based content of health-related websites". Patient education and counseling. 77 (1): 33–7. PMID 19372023.
  5. ^ Griffiths, KM; Christensen, H (Nov 15, 2005). "Website quality indicators for consumers". Journal of Medical Internet Research. 7 (5): e55. PMID 16403719.
  6. ^ Khazaal, Y; Chatton, A; Zullino, D; Khan, R (May 6, 2011). "HON Label and DISCERN as Content Quality Indicators of Health-Related Websites". The Psychiatric quarterly. PMID 21547515.
  7. ^ Morel, V; Chatton, A; Cochand, S; Zullino, D; Khazaal, Y (Oct 2008). "Quality of web-based information on bipolar disorder". Journal of Affective Disorders. 110 (3): 265–9. PMID 18280578.
  8. ^ Khazaal, Y; Chatton, A; Cochand, S; Zullino, D (Aug 2008). "Quality of Web-based information on cocaine addiction". Patient education and counseling. 72 (2): 336–41. PMID 18423952.
  9. ^ Coquard, O; Fernandez, S; Zullino, D; Khazaal, Y (Jun 10, 2011). "A follow-up study on the quality of alcohol dependence-related information on the web". Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy. 6: 13. PMID 21663650.
  10. ^ Zermatten, A; Khazaal, Y; Coquard, O; Chatton, A; Bondolfi, G (Sep 2010). "Quality of Web-based information on depression". Depression and anxiety. 27 (9): 852–8. PMID 20099271.
  11. ^ Patel, U; Cobourne, MT (Feb 2011). "Orthodontic extractions and the Internet: quality of online information available to the public". American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics. 139 (2): e103-9. PMID 21300220.
  12. ^ Hanif, F; Read, JC; Goodacre, JA; Chaudhry, A; Gibbs, P (Dec 2009). "The role of quality tools in assessing reliability of the internet for health information". Informatics for health & social care. 34 (4): 231–43. PMID 19919300.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine/Research/BestWork&oldid=869114180"