Cargando…

Did online publishers “get it right”? Using a naturalistic search strategy to review cognitive health promotion content on internet webpages

BACKGROUND: One of the most common uses of the Internet is to search for health-related information. Although scientific evidence pertaining to cognitive health promotion has expanded rapidly in recent years, it is unclear how much of this information has been made available to Internet users. Thus,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hunter, P.V., Delbaere, M., O’Connell, M. E., Cammer, A., Seaton, J. X., Friedrich, T., Fick, F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5472889/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28619010
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0515-3
_version_ 1783244201360621568
author Hunter, P.V.
Delbaere, M.
O’Connell, M. E.
Cammer, A.
Seaton, J. X.
Friedrich, T.
Fick, F.
author_facet Hunter, P.V.
Delbaere, M.
O’Connell, M. E.
Cammer, A.
Seaton, J. X.
Friedrich, T.
Fick, F.
author_sort Hunter, P.V.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: One of the most common uses of the Internet is to search for health-related information. Although scientific evidence pertaining to cognitive health promotion has expanded rapidly in recent years, it is unclear how much of this information has been made available to Internet users. Thus, the purpose of our study was to assess the reliability and quality of information about cognitive health promotion encountered by typical Internet users. METHODS: To generate a list of relevant search terms employed by Internet users, we entered seed search terms in Google Trends and recorded any terms consistently used in the prior 2 years. To further approximate the behaviour of typical Internet users, we entered each term in Google and sampled the first two relevant results. This search, completed in October 2014, resulted in a sample of 86 webpages, 48 of which had content related to cognitive health promotion. An interdisciplinary team rated the information reliability and quality of these webpages using a standardized measure. RESULTS: We found that information reliability and quality were moderate, on average. Just one retrieved page mentioned best practice, national recommendations, or consensus guidelines by name. Commercial content (i.e., product promotion, advertising content, or non-commercial) was associated with differences in reliability and quality, with product promoter webpages having the lowest mean reliability and quality ratings. CONCLUSIONS: As efforts to communicate the association between lifestyle and cognitive health continue to expand, we offer these results as a baseline assessment of the reliability and quality of cognitive health promotion on the Internet. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12877-017-0515-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5472889
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54728892017-06-21 Did online publishers “get it right”? Using a naturalistic search strategy to review cognitive health promotion content on internet webpages Hunter, P.V. Delbaere, M. O’Connell, M. E. Cammer, A. Seaton, J. X. Friedrich, T. Fick, F. BMC Geriatr Research Article BACKGROUND: One of the most common uses of the Internet is to search for health-related information. Although scientific evidence pertaining to cognitive health promotion has expanded rapidly in recent years, it is unclear how much of this information has been made available to Internet users. Thus, the purpose of our study was to assess the reliability and quality of information about cognitive health promotion encountered by typical Internet users. METHODS: To generate a list of relevant search terms employed by Internet users, we entered seed search terms in Google Trends and recorded any terms consistently used in the prior 2 years. To further approximate the behaviour of typical Internet users, we entered each term in Google and sampled the first two relevant results. This search, completed in October 2014, resulted in a sample of 86 webpages, 48 of which had content related to cognitive health promotion. An interdisciplinary team rated the information reliability and quality of these webpages using a standardized measure. RESULTS: We found that information reliability and quality were moderate, on average. Just one retrieved page mentioned best practice, national recommendations, or consensus guidelines by name. Commercial content (i.e., product promotion, advertising content, or non-commercial) was associated with differences in reliability and quality, with product promoter webpages having the lowest mean reliability and quality ratings. CONCLUSIONS: As efforts to communicate the association between lifestyle and cognitive health continue to expand, we offer these results as a baseline assessment of the reliability and quality of cognitive health promotion on the Internet. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12877-017-0515-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5472889/ /pubmed/28619010 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0515-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hunter, P.V.
Delbaere, M.
O’Connell, M. E.
Cammer, A.
Seaton, J. X.
Friedrich, T.
Fick, F.
Did online publishers “get it right”? Using a naturalistic search strategy to review cognitive health promotion content on internet webpages
title Did online publishers “get it right”? Using a naturalistic search strategy to review cognitive health promotion content on internet webpages
title_full Did online publishers “get it right”? Using a naturalistic search strategy to review cognitive health promotion content on internet webpages
title_fullStr Did online publishers “get it right”? Using a naturalistic search strategy to review cognitive health promotion content on internet webpages
title_full_unstemmed Did online publishers “get it right”? Using a naturalistic search strategy to review cognitive health promotion content on internet webpages
title_short Did online publishers “get it right”? Using a naturalistic search strategy to review cognitive health promotion content on internet webpages
title_sort did online publishers “get it right”? using a naturalistic search strategy to review cognitive health promotion content on internet webpages
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5472889/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28619010
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0515-3
work_keys_str_mv AT hunterpv didonlinepublishersgetitrightusinganaturalisticsearchstrategytoreviewcognitivehealthpromotioncontentoninternetwebpages
AT delbaerem didonlinepublishersgetitrightusinganaturalisticsearchstrategytoreviewcognitivehealthpromotioncontentoninternetwebpages
AT oconnellme didonlinepublishersgetitrightusinganaturalisticsearchstrategytoreviewcognitivehealthpromotioncontentoninternetwebpages
AT cammera didonlinepublishersgetitrightusinganaturalisticsearchstrategytoreviewcognitivehealthpromotioncontentoninternetwebpages
AT seatonjx didonlinepublishersgetitrightusinganaturalisticsearchstrategytoreviewcognitivehealthpromotioncontentoninternetwebpages
AT friedricht didonlinepublishersgetitrightusinganaturalisticsearchstrategytoreviewcognitivehealthpromotioncontentoninternetwebpages
AT fickf didonlinepublishersgetitrightusinganaturalisticsearchstrategytoreviewcognitivehealthpromotioncontentoninternetwebpages