WEMJ Volume 119 No 1 July 2020
Introduction
Websites targeted at the public on “COVID-19” and “coronavirus disease 2019” had a significantly lower DISCERN score (p=0.03) but were more readable (p=0.02). Websites adhering to the JAMA benchmarks would improve quality, whilst shortening sentences and removing medical jargon would improve readability.
WEMJ Volume 119 No 1 July 2020
Coronavirus and the Internet: is information readable and reliable?
This was a review of the quality and readability of online resources relating to the coronavirus. We used Google to search for the terms “COVID-19” and “coronavirus disease 2019” and reviewed the top 50 results. Quality was measured using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark, the DISCERN instrument and Health on the Net code (HONcode) accreditation. Readability was analysed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and Gunning Fog Index (GFI). The study included 33 sites. None of the sites were HONcode accredited. The mean (SD) JAMA and DISCERN scores were 1.24/4 (1.2) and 42.85/80 (12.66) respectively, indicating ‘fair’ quality. Mean (SD) GFI and FRES scores were 13.74 (1.98) and 50.1 (11.25) respectively, indicating a lack of comprehensibility. Websites targeted at the public had a significantly lower DISCERN score (p=0.03) but were more readable (p=0.02). Websites adhering to the JAMA benchmarks would improve quality, whilst shortening sentences and removing medical jargon would improve readability.
Download the full article as a PDF