EDITORIAL - Trying to measure the quality of health information on the Internet: is it time to move on?

[Guest guest]

Journal of Rheumatology

Jan 2009

Editorial

Trying to Measure the Quality of Health Information on the Internet:

Is It Time to Move On?

AMOL DESHPANDE, MD, MBA,

Consultant, Comprehensive Pain Program,

University Health Network and University of Toronto;

ALEJANDRO R. JADAD, MD, DPhil, FRCPC, FCAHS,

Chief Innovator and Founder, Centre for Global eHealth Innovation,

Canada Research Chair in eHealth Innovation,

Rose Family Chair in Supportive Care,

Professor, Departments of Public Health Sciences;

Health Policy, Management and Evaluation; and Anesthesia,

University Health Network and University of Toronto,

Toronto, Canada

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Be careful about reading health books. You may die of a misprint. — Mark Twain

CHRONICLING THE JOURNEY

The Internet has forever changed the way we access and obtain health

information. In 2006, the Pew Internet & American Life Project

estimated that almost 80% of Internet users had searched for online

health information, with medical diseases, health problems, medical

treatment, and nutrition being the most popular topics1. Yet, for

almost 2 decades, ever since Tim Berners-Lee introduced the World Wide

Web to the public, there has continued to be an underlying concern

about the quality of health information available online.

The natural assumption is to believe that there exists a link between

the quality of information on the Internet and harm. However, a

systematic review attempting to evaluate the number and

characteristics of reported cases of harm in the peer-review

literature determined that for a variety of reasons, there was little

evidence to support this notion2. Nonetheless, considerable resources

continue to be spent on developing and disseminating quality

assessment tools to evaluate online health information.

***********************************************

Read the whole editorial here:

http://www.jrheum.com/subscribers/09/01/1.html

Not an MD