Seeing Is Believing? A Mixed-Methods Study Exploring the Quality and Perceived Trustworthiness of Online Information About Chronic Conditions Aimed at Children and Young People
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The numbers of children and young people with chronic conditions are increasing. While their information needs may vary, providing health care information can have considerable benefits, including better emotional health, less distress during treatments, and greater satisfaction with medical care. The Internet is increasingly being used to communicate health-related information to children about a range of chronic conditions. However, the quality of such websites is underexplored. Thus, the objectives of this study were to evaluate the reliability and quality of online information for children about chronic conditions using a standardized evaluation tool, and to explore children's and young people's perceptions of quality and trustworthiness regarding online health information. The study consisted of two phases. In Phase 1, websites about common pediatric chronic conditions aimed at children and containing treatment or management options were identified and the quality assessment tool DISCERN was completed. Test-retest and interrater reliability were calculated. In Phase 2, two focus groups with laptop computers were conducted with children and young people with a chronic condition to explore their perceptions of trustworthiness of online health information. In Phase 1, 165 websites were identified and 100 met the criteria and were assessed. The mean DISCERN score of all sites was 48.16 out of 75 (SD = 7.97, range 28-71, min 15 to max 75). Quality scores varied widely across the sample. The internal consistency and interrater reliability scores were both lower than previously reported in studies using the DISCERN to assess information for adults. In Phase 2, two focus groups with a total of six participants aged 11-23 years revealed a relative lack of concern about the quality and trustworthiness of online health information. Older participants reported judging the source and authorship of websites, but other participants did not question the source of the information they found online. Although personal websites were perceived to be less reliable than those from well-known medical institutions, they were still valued by many of the participants. Overall, there were relatively few websites about pediatric chronic conditions aimed at children, with variable quality and reliability. However, DISCERN's use with pediatric websites across a broad spectrum of developmental stages is limited. Children and young people demonstrated a need for more guidance around assessing trustworthiness of online information. A more appropriate quality assessment tool is warranted, which could usefully be employed by health care professionals, children, and parents.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,020 | 0,028 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».