Posters

Evaluating the quality and readability of information on keratoconus treatment

Poster Details

First Author: H.Hamze UK

Co Author(s): A. Riaz   J. Panthagani                 

Abstract Details

Purpose:

Keratoconus patients and their families are increasingly turning to the internet for more information regarding their condition. Studies have shown that online information in various health domains is highly variable in terms of quality and consistency with evidence-based medicine. Therefore, this study assessed the quality of online information available for keratoconus.

Setting:

N/A

Methods:

Google.com was searched on October 2019 using the following terms “keratoconus treatment”, “keratoconus management” and the first 50 hits were analysed. Google rank and the Alexa tool were used to determine the popularity of included websites. The quality of information provided on these websites was assessed using Health on the Net (HON) criteria, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and the DISCERN questionnaire. Readability was assessed using Flesch–Kincaid Reading Ease (FRE), Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level (FKG) and Automated Readability Index (ARI) scores. Two evaluators independently assessed the websites and the mean scores were used for the DISCERN tool.

Results:

Twenty-eight websites were included in the analysis. Using weighted kappa score, the inter-rater reliability was 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1) which indicates very good agreement (>0.8). Mean DISCERN score was 33.85 ±11.57 (maximum possible score 80). Rnib.org.uk scored the highest (57). Only 4 websites met all JAMA criteria and 4 had HON certification. 96% of websites had an FKG level higher than the American Medical Association recommendation of sixth-grade level. FRE score mean 53 ±8.04 – ‘fairly difficult to read’. ARI mean 7.1 ±2.5 – seventh grade level. There was no correlation between the DISCERN scores, Google and Alexa rank.

Conclusions:

Among the 28 most popular websites on the topic of keratoconus treatment, the quality of online information was highly variable. The results from this study show that the vast majority of information online is of poor quality with confusing advice. Providing accurate and credible information to patients regarding treatment choices available for keratoconus is important for patients to make informed decisions. Patient should be specifically directed to certain websites for this that are formally assessed and appraised.

Financial Disclosure:

None