Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: In less than 20 years, the Internet has grown from a small private network to a worldwide phenomenon, which experts predict will be used by more than 1 billion people before the end of 2005. The use of health information has increased markedly over the last 5 years, but this explosion in usage has not been matched by an increase in the quality of information [1]. The vast majority of health care web sites remain inaccessible, unusable and unreliable.
Aim: To develop an easy to use tool that assesses the accessibility, usability and reliability of health care web sites [2].
Methods: This tool was used to study 20 leading web sites: 10 UK cancer charities, 5 UK sites aimed at health care professionals, and 5 Cochrane sites from around the world.
Results: The findings are startling:
The vast majority of sites do not meet the accessibility standard recommended by the UK or US governments and are therefore running the risk of legal action from disabled users.
Usability issues are frequently ignored, resulting in sites which are difficult to use and hard to understand.
Few sites have a clear quality control policy and many feature health information which is inaccurate and potentially dangerous.
Conclusions: Good information empowers people. By giving them access to the best quality knowledge about their health care questions, we can improve the quality of choices they make about care for themselves or their loved ones. Conversely, bad information hinders both health professionals and their patients from making informed choices.
Web site developers can make a difference by recognising where they have gone wrong in the past and by including new techniques in their development plans, which maximise the accessibility, usability and reliability of the sites that they build.
References:
1. Purcell GP, Wilson P, Delamothe T. The quality of health information on the internet. BMJ 2002; 324:557-8 http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/324/7337/557
2. Minervation validation instrument for health care web sites: http://www.minervation.com/mod_lida/minervalidation.pdf
Aim: To develop an easy to use tool that assesses the accessibility, usability and reliability of health care web sites [2].
Methods: This tool was used to study 20 leading web sites: 10 UK cancer charities, 5 UK sites aimed at health care professionals, and 5 Cochrane sites from around the world.
Results: The findings are startling:
The vast majority of sites do not meet the accessibility standard recommended by the UK or US governments and are therefore running the risk of legal action from disabled users.
Usability issues are frequently ignored, resulting in sites which are difficult to use and hard to understand.
Few sites have a clear quality control policy and many feature health information which is inaccurate and potentially dangerous.
Conclusions: Good information empowers people. By giving them access to the best quality knowledge about their health care questions, we can improve the quality of choices they make about care for themselves or their loved ones. Conversely, bad information hinders both health professionals and their patients from making informed choices.
Web site developers can make a difference by recognising where they have gone wrong in the past and by including new techniques in their development plans, which maximise the accessibility, usability and reliability of the sites that they build.
References:
1. Purcell GP, Wilson P, Delamothe T. The quality of health information on the internet. BMJ 2002; 324:557-8 http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/324/7337/557
2. Minervation validation instrument for health care web sites: http://www.minervation.com/mod_lida/minervalidation.pdf