Documental Quality of Websites Concerning Physical Activity, Lifestyle and Sedentarism Available on the Internet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To analyze the documental quality of 389 websites in Portuguese about physical activity, healthy lifestyles and sedentary lifestyles found on the Brazilian version of the general search engine Google. Methods: The documental quality of the 389 websites was estimated based upon the following parameters: 1) a combination of quality criteria from the Health Information Locator (LIS—OPS/BIREME) and those from Chile’s Pontifical Catholic University, organized into 17 variables; 2) uniformity of reference criteria (Vancouver); 3) association between the presence of authorship and a higher number of the quality criteria being fulfilled. We also studied the ranking of the results presented by Google in addition to attributes connected to the websites’ target audience, the types of content, their sponsors and country of origin. Results: Of the 389 websites studied, 111 links were not active (28.53% CI 95% [24.05 - 33.02]) and none of the websites in the sample met all of the 17 quality variables. Authored websites displayed remarkable differences in quality when compared to those which did not identify their authors. Conclusions: Faced with the issue of the proliferation of websites with questionable quality content, and the fact that the ranking of results interferes directly in the internal evaluation of content relevance, we propose that public-health research institutions cooperate with web-searching developers to improve the website-positioning formula, in which the “identified authorship” criterion should play a major role in the ranking system.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".