Releases Saturday 9 March 2002
No 7337 Volume 324
Please remember to credit the BMJ as source when publicising
an
article and to tell your readers that they can read its full text on
the
journal's web site (http://bmj.com).
If your story is posted on a website please include a link back to
the source BMJ article (URL's are given under titles).
(1) APPARENTLY CREDIBLE WEBSITES MAY NOT
BE ACCURATE
(2) QUALITY
OF HEALTH INFORMATION ON THE
INTERNET HAS
IMPROVED
(3) MOST
POPULAR WEBSITES NOT NECESSARILY
OF HIGHEST
QUALITY
(4) SMOKERS
DISILLUSIONED AND
OVER-OPTIMISTIC
ABOUT QUITTING
(1) APPARENTLY
CREDIBLE WEBSITES MAY NOT
BE ACCURATE
(Accuracy of information on apparently
credible websites:
survey of five common health topics)
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7337/581
Apparently credible websites may not necessarily
provide
higher levels of accurate health information,
finds a study in
this week's BMJ.
Researchers examined the relation between
credibility
features and accuracy of contents of 121
websites that
provided information on five common health
topic: chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease, ankle sprain,
emergency
contraception, menorrhagia, and female
sterilisation.
The entire contents of the selected websites
were assessed
for three credibility features (source,
currency, and evidence
hierarchy) and accuracy of contents. They
found 93% of
websites described the source of medical
information, 49%
displayed the date that the information
was posted, and 18%
displayed evidence hierarchy (i.e. levels
assigned to various
pieces of information were related to
their validity or
methodological quality).
Accuracy of website contents was judged
against recognised
guidelines for each of the five health
topics. Websites with a
description of credibility features tended
to have higher levels
of accuracy, but this relationship was
not strong, say the
authors.
They conclude: "Our study shows that features
of website
credibility have only slight or at best
moderate correlation
with accuracy of information in five common
health topics.
Thus, apparently credible websites may
not necessarily
provide higher levels of accurate health
information."
Contact:
Khalid S Khan, Consultant, Education Resource
Centre,
Birmingham Women's Hospital, Birmingham,
UK
Email: k.s.khan{at}bham.ac.uk
(2) QUALITY OF
HEALTH INFORMATION ON THE
INTERNET HAS IMPROVED
(Follow up of quality of public oriented
health information on
the world wide web: systematic re-evaluation)
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7337/582
The quality of health information on the
internet has improved
over the past few years despite concerns
over poor quality
and its possible consequences, concludes
a study in this
week's BMJ.
In 1997, the quality of web information
on managing fever in
children at home was assessed and was
found to be poor.
Four years later, researchers in Italy
re-evaluated the quality
of these web pages, plus a more recent
sample of pages,
using the same methods.
They found 19 of the 41 (46%) original
pages still existed. Of
these, two had additional information.
Five pages had been
replaced with new content and three were
the same as the
original pages.
Only two (5%) of the new pages adhered
to the guidelines
for quality of content compared with three
(8%) of the
original pages. However, 18 (45%) of the
new pages
compared with only three (8%) of the original
pages adhered
to most of the guidelines.
They conclude that, although the quality
of health information
on the internet has improved over the
past few years,
monitoring health information on the internet
for accuracy,
completeness, and consistency is still
fundamental.
Contact:
Chiara Pandolfini, Senior Research Fellow,
Laboratory for
Mother and Child Health, Istituto di Ricerche
Farmacologiche, Milan, Italy
Email: chiara{at}marionegri.it
(3) MOST POPULAR
WEBSITES NOT NECESSARILY
OF HIGHEST QUALITY
(Breast cancer on the world wide
web: cross sectional survey
of quality of information and popularity
of websites)
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7337/577
The more popular websites providing information
about
breast cancer are not necessarily of higher
quality, concludes
a study in this week's BMJ.
The search engine Google was used to generate
a list of
websites about breast cancer. The top
200 sites returned by
Google were divided into "more popular"
and "less popular"
based on the number of links to a site
from other sites.
More popular sites were more likely to
contain information
on ongoing clinical trials, results of
trials than less popular
ones. More popular sites were also more
likely to provide
updates on other breast cancer research,
information on
legislation and advocacy, and a message
board service.
More popular and less popular websites
did not differ in any
of the quality measures studies. Furthermore,
the presence of
inaccurate information did not differ
between more popular
and less popular sites.
These results show that type rather than
quality of content
determines popularity of websites, say
the authors. It remains
the responsibility of the medical community
to ensure
adequate of online medical content, to
educate the public
regarding quality measures, and to direct
patients to sites of
known quality, they conclude.
Contact:
Funda Meric, Assistant Professor, Department
of Surgical
Oncology, University of Texas, Texas,
USA
Email: fmeric{at}mail.mdanderson.org
(4) SMOKERS DISILLUSIONED
AND
OVER-OPTIMISTIC ABOUT QUITTING
(Letter: Effectiveness of smoking
cessation initiatives)
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7337/608
Most smokers are disenchanted with smoking
and would not
smoke if they had their time again, according
to a letter in this
week's BMJ. It also shows that smokers'
expectations of
how soon they will quit greatly exceed
rates of quitting
observed in recent history.
A national sample of 893 smokers were asked:
"If you had
your time again would you start smoking?"
Over 80% said
that they would not (79% men, 87% women).
Those aged
45 to 64 were most regretful, with 90%
saying that they
would not smoke given their time again.
This may reflect the
mounting distress of smokers reaching
the age at which the
main smoking related diseases are becoming
noticeable in
themselves and among their peers, suggest
the authors.
The survey also showed that most smokers
overestimate the
likelihood of stopping in the future and
greatly underestimate
how long it is likely to take. Over half
expected to stop within
two years, but in recent history only
6% manage this.
Young people were also very disenchanted
with smoking.
Seventy eight per cent of those aged 16
to 24 declared that
they would not smoke given their time
again. Young people
were also prone to extreme optimism about
quitting. Eighty
per cent of young smokers (age 16-29)
expect they will have
quit within 10 years, but in 1998 65%
of people that had
ever smoked were still smoking at age
40, and 46% at age
60.
The widespread disaffection with smoking
among smokers,
combined with their tendency to be deluded
about how easy
and quick it will be to stop, justifies
extra urgency in
promoting chances to stop, say the authors.
No Smoking
Day on 13 March will prompt smokers to
make a credible
attempt at stopping so that they can live
the life they would
want if they had their time again, they
conclude.
Contacts:
Clive Bates, Director, Action on Smoking
and Health (ASH),
London, UK
Email: clive.bates{at}dial.pipex.com
Doreen McIntyre, Chief Executive, No Smoking
Day
Email: doreen{at}nosmokingday.org.uk
FOR ACCREDITED JOURNALISTS
Embargoed press releases and articles are available from:
Public Affairs Division
BMA House
Tavistock Square
London WC1H 9JR
(contact: pressoffice{at}bma.org.uk)
and from:
the EurekAlert website, run by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science
(http://www.eurekalert.org)
What's new
Keep updated
Services
Tools
Online poll
Resources
Print issues
