International Journal of Medical Informatics
Volume 75, Issue 1 , Pages 42-57 , January 2006

The initial development of the WebMedQual scale: Domain assessment of the construct of quality of health web sites

References 

  1. PEW Internet Project, December 2002 Survey, in: Daily Internet Activity, http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/chart.asp?img=Daily_A8.htm [accessed March 2003].
  2. Taylor H, Leitman R. Four-nation survey shows widespread but different levels of Internet use for health purposes. HarrisInteractive Health Care Res. 2002;2(11):4;http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/newsletters/healthnews/HI_HealthCareNews2002Vol2_Iss11.pdf
  3. Taylor H, Leitman R. No significant change in the numbers of “Cyberchondriacs”—those who go online for health care information. HarrisInteractive Health Care Res. 2003;3(4):4;http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/newsletters/healthnews/HI_HealthCareNews2003Vol3_Iss04.pdf
  4. M. Madden, L. Rainie, America's Online Pursuits: the changing pictures of who's online and what they do, PEW Internet and American Life Project, December 22, 2003, http://www.pewinternet.org/reports//toc.asp?Report=106 [accessed March 2004].
  5. Baker L, Wagner TH, Singer S, Bundorf MK. Use of the Internet and e-mail for health care information. JAMA. 2003;289(18):2400–2406
  6. URAC, American Accreditation HealthCare Commission, Washington, DC, USA, http://www.urac.org [accessed March 2003].
  7. Winker MA, Flanagin A, Chi-Lum B, White J, Andrews K, Kennett RL, et al. Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the Internet: principles governing AMA web sites, American Medical Association (AMA). JAMA. 2000;283(12):1600–1606
  8. Commission of the European Communities, eEurope 2002: quality criteria for health related websites, J. Med. Internet Res. 4(2) (2002) e15, http://www.jmir.org/2002/3/e15/index.htm.
  9. Health On the Net Foundation (HON), Geneva, Switzerland, http://www.hon.ch [accessed March 2001].
  10. HONcode of Conduct, Health On the Net Foundation, Geneva, Switzerland, Version 1.6, April 1997, http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Conduct.html [accessed February 17 2003].
  11. Smith R. The invention of talk. BMJ. 2002;324:http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7337/0/j
  12. Ferguson T. From patients to end users: quality of online patient networks needs more attention than quality of online health information. BMJ. 2002;324:555–556http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/324/7337/555
  13. Purcell GP, Wilson P, Delamothe T. The quality of health information on the Internet: as for any other medium it varies widely; the regulation is not the answer. BMJ. 2002;324:557–558http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/324/7337/557
  14. Helft PR, Hlubocky F, Daugherty CK. American oncologists’ views of Internet use by cancer patients: a mail survey of American Society of Clinical Oncology members. J. Clin. Oncol. 2003;21:942–947http://www.jco.org/cgi/content/full/21/5/942
  15. S. Barrett, QuackWatch, Allentown, PA, USA, http://www.quackwatch.org/ [accessed March 2003].
  16. Charatan F. Buyer beware” remains US policy towards information on the net. BMJ. 2002;324:566;http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/324/7337/566
  17. Athanaselis S, Stefanidou M, Karakoukis N, Koutselinis A. Asphyxial death by ether inhalation and plastic-bag suffocation instructed by the press and the Internet. J. Med. Internet Res. 2002;4(3):e18;http://www.jmir.org/2002/3/e18/
  18. Smith R. Almost no evidence exists that the Internet harms health. BMJ. 2001;323:651
  19. Kiley R. Does the Internet harm health? Some evidence exists that the Internet does harm health. BMJ. 2002;324:238–239
  20. Crocco AG, Villasis-Keever M, Jadad AR. Analysis of cases of harm associated with use of health information on the Internet. JAMA. 2002;287:2869–2871
  21. Eysenbach G, Köhler C. Does the Internet harm health? Database of adverse events related to the Internet has been set up. BMJ. 2002;324:239
  22. G. Eysenbach, C. Köhler, DAERI Database Adverse Events Related to the Internet, Heidelberg, Germany, http://www.medcertain.org/daeri/ [accessed March 2003].
  23. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa ER. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the World Wide Web: a systematic review. JAMA. 2002;287:2691–2700
  24. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet. JAMA. 1997;277:1244–1245
  25. Martin-Facklam M, Kostrzewa M, Schubert F, Gasse C, Haefeli WE. Quality markers of drug information on the Internet: an evaluation of sites about St. John's wort. Am. J. Med. 2002;113:740–745
  26. Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, Algazy JI, Kravitz RL, Broder MS, et al Health information on the Internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA. 2001;285:2612–2621
  27. Craigie M, Loader B, Burrows R, Muncer S. Reliability of health information on the Internet: an examination of experts’ ratings. J. Med. Internet Res. 2002;4:e2;http://www.jmir.org/2002/1/e2/
  28. Risk A, Petersen C. Health information on the Internet: quality issues and international initiatives. JAMA. 2002;287:2713–2715http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/287/20/2713
  29. Crocker L, Algina J. Introduction to Classical & Modern Test Theory. Orlando, FL: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.; 1986;
  30. Wyatt JC. Commentary: measuring quality and impact on the World Wide Web. BMJ. 1997;314:1879–1881
  31. Gagliardi A, Jadad AR. Examination of instruments used to rate quality of health information on the Internet: chronicle of a voyage with an unclear destination. BMJ. 2002;324:569–573
  32. Meric F, Bernstam EV, Mirza NQ, Hunt KK, Ames FC, Ross MI, et al. Breast cancer on the World Wide Web: cross sectional survey of quality of information and popularity of websites. BMJ. 2002;324:577–581
  33. Impicciatore P, Pandolfini C, Casella N, Bonati M. Reliability of health information for the public on the World Wide Web: systematic survey of advice on managing fever in children at home. BMJ. 1997;314:1875–1879
  34. Pandolfini C, Impicciatore P, Bonati M. Parents on the web: risks for quality management of cough in children. Pediatrics. 2000;105:e1
  35. Cooke A, Gray L. Evaluating the quality of internet-based information about alternative therapies: development of the BIOME guidelines. J. Public Health Med. 2002;24:261–267
  36. Li L, Irvin E, Guzman J, Bombardier C. Surfing for back pain patients: the nature and quality of back pain information on the Internet. Spine. 2001;26:545–557
  37. International Organization for Standardization, Technical Committee ISO/TC 176, SIO 8402: Quality Management and Quality Assurance—Vocabulary, 2nd ed., International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 1994.
  38. Eysenbach G, Diepgen T. Towards quality management of medical information on the Internet: evaluation, labelling, and filtering of information. BMJ. 1998;317:1496–1500
  39. MeSH®, Medical Subject Headings 2003, National Library of Medicine, USA, http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/ [accessed March 2003].
  40. Churchill GA. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J. Mark. Res. 1979;16:64–73
  41. Jadad A, Gagliardi A. Rating health information on the Internet, navigating to knowledge or to Babel?. JAMA. 1998;279:611–614
  42. Kim T, Thomas RE, Deering MJ, Maxfield A. Published criteria for evaluating health related Web sites: review. BMJ. 1999;318:647–649
  43. AARP (formerly known as the American Association of Retired Persons), Washington, DC, USA, http://www.aarp.org [accessed March 2001].
  44. J. Alexander, M.A. Tate, How to recognize an informational Web page, Widener University, Wolfgram Memorial Library, July 1996, http://www.science.widener.edu/∼withers/inform.htm [accessed March 2001].
  45. Altimed/PharmaLinks, Rating criteria, Mississauga, Ont., Canada, http://www.altimed.com/links/ratings.html [accessed March 2001] [inaccessible February 2003].
  46. D. D’Allessandro, Criteria for World Wide Web selection and inclusion, General Pediatrics, http://www.generalpediatrics.com/Mission.html#Criteria [accessed March 2001].
  47. M.P. D’Allessandro, About MedicalStudent.com, MedicalStudent, http://www.medicalstudent.com/#about [accessed March 2001].
  48. Growth House, Rating criteria and excellence awards, http://www.growthhouse.org/award.html [accessed March 2001].
  49. Healthfinder, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODPHP), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and other U.S. Federal agencies, http://www.healthfinder.gov/aboutus/selectionpolicy.htm [accessed March 2001].
  50. HealthWeb Project, Health sciences libraries of the Greater Midwest Region (GMR) of the National Network of Libraries of Medicine (NN/LM) and those of the Committee for Institutional Cooperation, http://healthweb.org/index.cfm [accessed March 2001].
  51. Kotecki JE, Siegel DE. Electronic notes: use of a critical thinking/questioning approach to evaluate WWW information. Am. J. Health Behav. 1998;22:75–76
  52. M. Larkin, Health information on-line, FDA Consumer 30 (1996) 21–25, http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/596_info.html [accessed March 2001].
  53. Lehigh, http://www.lib.lehigh.edu/evaluating.web.html [accessed March 2001].
  54. McGill University Health Sciences and Osler libraries, Internet Resources Selection Criteria, Canada, http://www.health.library.mcgill.ca/resource/criteria.htm [accessed March 2001].
  55. Medical Matrix, Sample Resource Evaluation Form, Updated 24 April 2000, http://www.medmatrix.org/info/sitesurvey.html [accessed February 2001].
  56. Net Wellness used the Health Summit I and II meetings criteria, http://www.mitretek.org/hiti/showcase/documents/criteria.html [accessed March 2001].
  57. NOAH: New YorkOnline Access to Health, http://www.noah-health.org/english/collection.html [accessed March 2001].
  58. OMNI: Organizing Medical Networked Information, Summary of Key Evaluation Questions, http://biome.ac.uk/guidelines/eval/summary.html [accessed February 2001].
  59. Pealer LN, Dorman SM. Evaluating health-related web sites. J. Sch. Health. 1997;67:232–235
  60. J.M. Grohol, Rating guidelines, Psych Central, http://www.grohol.com/rateguid.htm [accessed March 2001].
  61. Biosites, Pacific Southwest Regional Medical Library, Regents of the University of California, Selection Criteria for Internet Resources, http://www.library.ucsf.edu/biosites/help/guidelines.html [accessed March 2001, modified list accessed June 2002].
  62. Tufts University Nutrition Navigator, About the Ratings, http://navigator.tufts.edu/ratings.html [accessed February 2001].
  63. University of Colorado Health Sciences Center (Uchsc), http://www.uchsc.edu/csa/areahec/home/mapp/telehealth/wwweval.htm [accessed March 2001].
  64. Wilton Library, http:www.wiltonlibrary.org/eval.asp [accessed March 2001].
  65. Kaplan RM, Anderson JP. The general health policy model: an integrated approach. In:  Spilker B editors. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. New York: Raven Press; 1996;p. 309–322
  66. Kaplan RM, Bush JW, Berry CC. Health status: types of validity and the index of well-being. Health Serv. Res. 1976;11:478–507
  67. Zimmerman M, Mattia JI. The psychiatric diagnostic screening questionnaire: development, reliability and validity. Comprehens. Psychiatry. 2001;42:175–189
  68. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics notes: validating scales and indexes. BMJ. 2002;324:606–607
  69. Fry E. The readability graph validated at primary levels. Read. Teach. 1969;22:534–538
  70. Flesch R. A new readability yardstick. J. Appl. Psychol. 1948;32:221–233
  71. Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), Last Modified November 17 2003, http://www.cms.hhs.gov/hipaa/hipaa1/default.asp [accessed March 2004].
  72. Health On the Net, HONcode of Conduct (HONcode) for Medical and Health Web sites, Last Modified 3 May 2005 [accessed June 2005].
  73. URAC, American Accreditation HealthCare Commission, Washington, DC, USA, http://www.urac.org [accessed June 2005].

☆ This work was presented when M. Provost and D. Koompalum were doctoral candidates. B. Martin is now Associate Professor and Director of Pharmaceutical Evaluation and Policy at the University of Arkansas College of Pharmacy.

PII: S1386-5056(05)00148-6

doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2005.07.034

International Journal of Medical Informatics
Volume 75, Issue 1 , Pages 42-57 , January 2006

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution