TY - JOUR
T1 - Googling preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes
T2 - A systematic review of patient information available on the internet
AU - Hall, Megan
AU - Challacombe, Fiona
AU - Curran, Ciara
AU - Shennan, Andrew
AU - Story, Lisa
N1 - © 2023 The Authors. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Funding Information:
We are grateful to Anwen Gorry, MRCOG for her expert advice on the production and dissemination of high-quality patient information. We are also grateful to the women who have given time to help us understand priorities in patient information for PPROM, including women and their families affiliated with Little Heartbeats.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2023/10
Y1 - 2023/10
N2 - Background: Preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes (PPROM) complicates 3% of pregnancies and is associated with an increased risk of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. In an attempt to better understand this diagnosis, patients routinely resort to the internet for medical information. The lack of governance online leaves patients at risk of relying on low-quality websites. Objectives: To assess systematically the accuracy, quality, readability and credibility of World Wide Web pages on PPROM. Search Strategy: Five search engines (Google, AOL, Yahoo, Ask and Bing) were searched with location services and browser history disabled. Websites from the first page of all searches were included. Selection Criteria: Websites were included if they provided at least 300 words of health information aimed at patients relating to PPROM. Data Collection and Analysis: Validated assessments of health information readability, credibility and quality were undertaken, as was an accuracy assessment. Pertinent facts for accuracy assessment were based on feedback from healthcare professionals and patients through a survey. Characteristics were tabulated. Main Results: In all, 39 websites were included, with 31 different texts. No pages were written with a reading age of 11 years or less, none were considered credible, and only three were high quality. An accuracy score of 50% or more was obtained by 45% of websites. Information that patients considered pertinent was not consistently reported. Conclusions: Search engines produce information on PPROM that is low quality, low accuracy and not credible. It is also difficult to read. This risks disempowerment. Healthcare professionals and researchers must consider how to ensure patients have access to information that they can recognise as high quality.
AB - Background: Preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes (PPROM) complicates 3% of pregnancies and is associated with an increased risk of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. In an attempt to better understand this diagnosis, patients routinely resort to the internet for medical information. The lack of governance online leaves patients at risk of relying on low-quality websites. Objectives: To assess systematically the accuracy, quality, readability and credibility of World Wide Web pages on PPROM. Search Strategy: Five search engines (Google, AOL, Yahoo, Ask and Bing) were searched with location services and browser history disabled. Websites from the first page of all searches were included. Selection Criteria: Websites were included if they provided at least 300 words of health information aimed at patients relating to PPROM. Data Collection and Analysis: Validated assessments of health information readability, credibility and quality were undertaken, as was an accuracy assessment. Pertinent facts for accuracy assessment were based on feedback from healthcare professionals and patients through a survey. Characteristics were tabulated. Main Results: In all, 39 websites were included, with 31 different texts. No pages were written with a reading age of 11 years or less, none were considered credible, and only three were high quality. An accuracy score of 50% or more was obtained by 45% of websites. Information that patients considered pertinent was not consistently reported. Conclusions: Search engines produce information on PPROM that is low quality, low accuracy and not credible. It is also difficult to read. This risks disempowerment. Healthcare professionals and researchers must consider how to ensure patients have access to information that they can recognise as high quality.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85153375769&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/1471-0528.17498
DO - 10.1111/1471-0528.17498
M3 - Review article
C2 - 37077130
SN - 1470-0328
VL - 130
SP - 1298
EP - 1305
JO - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
JF - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
IS - 11
ER -