![Sample our Bioscience journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5925/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Bioscience.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Purpose
New therapies for retinitis pigmentosa (RP) have led to patients desiring more information about their disease. We assessed the readability, content, and accountability of online health information for RP and its treatments.
Methods
Two internet queries were performed: one pertaining to the condition RP, and another pertaining to treatments of RP. Three analyses were performed on the top search results that met eligibility criteria: (1) A readability analysis produced an average reading level; (2) A content analysis was conducted to score each source on the accuracy, completeness, clarity, and organization of the content; and (3) An accountability analysis was performed to evaluate adherence to accountability benchmarks, including authorship, attribution, disclosure, and currency.
Results
The mean reading level was 12.0 (SD = 3.2, 95% CI = 11.0–13.0) for the 8 RP webpages and 12.5 (SD = 3.1, 95% CI = 11.7–13.4) for the 10 RP treatment webpages. The mean content score for RP sites was 21.3 of 32 points (SD = 4.1, 95% CI = 19.5–23.0). The mean content score for RP treatment sites was 5.5 out of 16 points (SD = 3.7, 95% CI = 4.1–6.9). The inter-rater reliability was 0.973 (Cronbach’s alpha). For RP sites, the mean accountability score was 2.6 out of 4 points (SD = 0.9, 95% CI = 1.9–3.4). For RP treatment sites, the mean accountability score was 2 out of 4 points (SD = 0.9, 95% CI = 1.4–2.6).
Conclusion
Our data suggest that the online information available to patients regarding RP and RP treatment options exceeds the AMA-recommended sixth-grade reading level and contains gaps in content relevant to patients.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).