Surfing for Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Perspectives on Quality and Content of Information on the Internet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the quality and content of English language Internet information about juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) from the perspectives of consumers and healthcare professionals. METHODS: Key words relevant to JIA were searched across 10 search engines. Quality of information was appraised independently by 2 health professionals, 1 young adult with JIA, and a parent using the DISCERN tool. Concordance of the website content (i.e., accuracy and completeness) with available evidence about the management of JIA was determined. Readability was determined using Flesch-Kincaid grade level and Reading Ease Score. RESULTS: Out of the 3000 Web pages accessed, only 58 unique sites met the inclusion criteria. Of these sites only 16 had DISCERN scores above 50% (indicating fair quality). These sites were then rated by consumers. Most sites targeted parents and none were specifically developed for youth with JIA. The overall quality of website information was fair, with a mean DISCERN quality rating score of 48.92 out of 75 (+/- 6.56, range 34.0-59.5). Overall completeness of sites was 9.07 out of 16 (+/- 2.28, range 5.25-13.25) and accuracy was 3.09 out of 4 (+/- 0.86, range 2-4), indicating a moderate level of accuracy. Average Flesch-Kincaid grade level and Reading Ease Score were 11.48 (+/- 0.74, range 10.1-12.0) and 36.36 (+/- 10.86, range 6.30-48.1), respectively, indicating that the material was difficult to read. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the paucity of high quality Internet health information at an appropriate reading level for youth with JIA and their parents.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".