MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2408534204 · doi:10.1016/j.invent.2016.05.002

Information quality and dynamics of patients' interactions on tonsillectomy web resources

2016· article· en· W2408534204 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternet Interventions · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecUniversité LavalInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReadabilityQuality (philosophy)Information qualityHealth informationAvatarReading (process)MedicinePsychologyMedical educationHealth careInternet privacyComputer scienceInformation system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information technologies have drastically altered the way patients gather health-related information. By analysing web resources on tonsillectomy, we expose information quality and dynamics of patients' interactions in the online continuum. Readability was assessed using Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Gunning Fog Index (GFI). Comprehensibility and actionability were assessed using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). Metrics of forums included author characteristics (level of disclosure, gender, age, avatar image, etc.), posts' motive (community support vs. medical information) and content (word count, emoticon use, number of replies, etc.). Analysis of 6 professional medical websites, of 10 health information portals, and of 3 discussion forums totalizing 1369 posts on 358 threads, from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2014, reveals that online resources exceed understandability recommendations. Women were more present on online health forums (68.2% of authors disclosing their gender) and invested themselves more in their avatar. Authors replying were significantly older than authors of original posts (39.7 ± 0.8 years vs. 29.2 ± 0.9 years, p < 0.001). The degree of self-disclosure was inversely proportional to the requests for medical information (p < 0.001). Men and women were equally seeking medical information (men: 74.0%, women: 77.0%) and community support (men: 65.7%, women: 70.4%), however women responded more supportively (women 86.2%, men 59.1%, p < 0.001). The dynamics of patients' interactions used to overcome accessibility difficulties encountered is complex. This work outlines the necessity for comprehensible medical information to adequately answer patients' needs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.398 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it