Consulting <scp>D</scp>r. <scp>G</scp>oogle: Quality of Online Resources About Tympanostomy Tube Placement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Tympanostomy tube (TT) placement is common in children; however, family-centeredness and utility of online information used for decision making and understanding is unknown. We evaluate the quality of leading Internet resources describing TT placement. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional descriptive design. METHODS: We performed a Google (Menlo Park, CA) search for terms related to TTs. We defined quality using scaled readability measures (Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade-Level), understandability and actionability (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool), shared decision-making centrality (Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services informed consent guidelines), and clinical practice guideline (CPG) compatibility. Three reviewers coded each measure. Fleiss κ interrater reliability analysis was performed. RESULTS: Ten most frequently encountered websites were analyzed. One of 10 met national health literacy standards (mean 10th-grade level reading, median 9th, range 6-15th). All sites were understandable (mean understandability 81.9%, range 73%-92%). Most had low actionability scores (7 of 10, median 47%, mean 44.6%, range 0-80). Shared decision-making centrality was high (mean 5, range 4-6), but most did not list alternative treatment options. Although CPG compatibility was high (mean 3.4, range 1-4), many websites contained inconsistent recommendations about tube duration, follow-up, and water precautions. There was inter-rater agreement for understandability scoring (κ = 0.20; P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Internet resources about TT placement vary in quality pertaining to health literacy, principles of shared decision making, and consistency with practice guidelines. With growing emphasis on patient-/family-centered engagement in healthcare decision making, standardization of content and improved usability of educational materials for common surgical procedures in children such as tympanostomy tube placement should be a public health priority. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA. Laryngoscope, 128:496-501, 2018.
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".