Quality and readability of English-language internet information for adults with hearing impairment and their significant others

References

• Ademiluyi G., Rees C.E. & Sheard C.E. 2003. Evaluating the reliability and validity of three tools to assess the quality of health information on the internet. Patient Educ Couns, 50, 151–155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2006. Health Literacy, Australia. Retrieved September 9, 2011 from http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/73ED158C6B14BB5ECA2574720011AB83/$File/42330_2006.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Berger M., Wagner T.H. & Baker L.C. 2005. Internet use and stigmatized illness. Soc Sci Med, 61, 1821–1827.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernstam E.V., Shelton D.M., Walji M. & Meric-Bernstam F. 2005. Instruments to assess the quality of health information on the world wide web: What can our patients actually use? Int J Med Inform, 74, 13–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyer C., Selby M., Scherrer J.R. & Appel R.D. 1998. The Health On the Net code of conduct for medical and health websites. Comput Biol Med, 28, 603–610.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bundorf M.K., Wagner T.H., Singer S.J. & Baker L.C. 2006. Who searches the internet for health information? Health Serv Res, 41, 819–836.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bylund C.L., Gueguen J.A., Sabee C.M., Imes R.S., Li Y. . 2007. Provider-patient dialogue about internet health information: An exploration of strategies to improve the provider-patient relationship. Patient Educ Couns, 66, 346–352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canadian Council on Learning. 2008. Health Literacy in Canada: A Healthy Understanding. Retrieved September 9, 2011 from http://www.ccl-cca.ca/pdfs/HealthLiteracy/HealthLiteracyReportFeb2008E.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Charnock D., Shepperd S., Needham G. & Gann R. 1999. DISCERN: An instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health, 53, 105–111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Couper M.P., Singer E., Levin C.A., Fowler F.J. Jr., Fagerlin A. . 2010. Use of the internet and ratings of information sources for medical decisions: Results from the DECISIONS survey. Med Decis Making, 30 (Suppl. 5), 106–114.
   Google Scholar
• Eysenbach G. & Köhler C. 2002. How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ, 324, 57–577.
   Google Scholar
• Eysenbach G., Powell J., Kuss O. & Sa E.-R. 2002. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: A systematic review. JAMA, 287, 2691–2700.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flesch R. 1948. A new readability yardstick. J Appl Psychol, 32, 221–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox S. 2011. Health topics: 80% of internet users look for health information online (Pew Internet & American Life Project, February 1, 2011). Retrieved September 9, 2011 from http://www.pewinternet.org/∼/media//Files/Reports/2011/PIP_HealthTopics.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Gagliardi A. & Jadad A.R. 2002. Examination of instruments used to rate quality of health information on the internet: Chronicle of a voyage with an unclear destination. BMJ, 324, 569–573.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greywoode J., Bluman E., Spiegel J. & Boon M. 2009. Readability analysis of patient information on the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery website. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 141, 555–558.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesse B.W., Nelson D.E., Kreps G.L., Croyle R.T., Arora N.K. . 2005. Trust and sources of health information: The impact of the internet and its implications for health care providers. Arch Intern Med, 165, 2618–2624.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hétu R. 1996. The stigma attached to hearing impairment. Scan Audiol, 25(Suppl. 43), 12–24.
   Google Scholar
• Hunter B.G. & Bridger M.W. 2008. An out-patient study into the suitability of providing ear, nose, & throat patients with internet based information. Internet J Med Inform, 3(2).
   Google Scholar
• Kieran S.M., Skinner L.J., Donnelly M. & Smyth D.A. 2010. A critical evaluation of web sites offering patient information on tinnitus. ENT – Ear Nose Throat J, 89, E11–E14.
   Google Scholar
• Laplante-Lévesque A., Hickson L. & Worrall L. 2010. Factors influencing rehabilitation decisions of adults with acquired hearing impairment. Int J Audiol, 49, 497–507.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laplante-Lévesque A., Pichora-Fuller M.K.. & Gagné J.-P. 2006. Providing an internet-based audiological counselling programme to new hearing aid users: A qualitative study. Int J Audiol, 45, 697–706.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ley P. & Florio T. 1996. The use of readability formulas in health care. Psychol Health Med, 1, 7–28.
   Google Scholar
• McLaughlin G.H. 1969. SMOG grading: A new readability formula. J Reading, 12, 639–646.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMullan M. 2006. Patients using the internet to obtain health information: How this affects the patient-health professional relationship. Patient Educ Couns, 63, 24–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meade C.D. & Smith C.F. 1991. Readability formulas: Cautions and criteria. Patient Educ Couns, 17, 153–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nair E.L. & Cienkowski K.M. 2010. The impact of health literacy on patient understanding of counseling and education materials. Int J Audiol, 49, 71–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Net Marketshare 2011. Search Engine Market Share [May 2011]. Retrieved September 9, 2011 from http://marketshare.hitslink.com.
   Google Scholar
• Paasche-Orlow M.K., Parker R.M., Gazmararian J.A., Nielsen-Bohlman L.T. & Rudd R.R. 2005. The prevalence of limited health literacy. J Gen Intern Med, 20, 175–184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pandolfini C. & Bonati M. 2002. Follow up of quality of public oriented health information on the worldwide web: Systematic re-evaluation. BMJ, 324, 582–583.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pothier D.D. 2005. Patients and the internet: Are websites on glue ear readable? Clin Otolaryngol, 30, 566–576.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robins D., Holmes J. & Stansbury M. 2010. Consumer health information on the web: The relationship of visual design and perceptions of credibility. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol, 61, 13–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silberg W.M., Lundberg G.D. & Musacchio R.A. 1997. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the internet: Caveat lector et viewor: Let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA, 277, 1244–1245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sommerhalder K., Abraham A., Zufferey M.C., Barth J. & Abel T. 2009. Internet information and medical consultations: Experiences from patients, and physicians’ perspectives. Patient Educ Couns, 77, 266–271.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorén E., Svensson M., Törnqvist A., Andersson G., Carlbring P. . 2011. Rehabilitative online education versus internet discussion group for hearing aid users: A randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Audiol, 22, 274–285.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh T.M. & Volsko T.A. 2008. Readability assessment of internet-based consumer health information. Respir Care, 53, 1310–1315.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). WAI: Strategies, guidelines, resources to make the web accessible to people with disabilities. Retrieved September 9, 2011 from http://www.w3.org/WAI.
   Google Scholar