Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
Date Submitted: Oct 3, 2021
Date Accepted: Jan 20, 2022
Date Submitted to PubMed: Feb 2, 2022
Analysis of official websites providing online information on COVID-19 vaccination: readability, content quality, and listing of side effects
ABSTRACT
Background:
Online information on COVID-19 vaccination may influence people’s perception and willingness to be vaccinated. Official websites of vaccination programs have not been systematically assessed before.
Objective:
This study aimed to assess and compare the readability and content quality of Web-based information on COVID-19 vaccination posted on official/governmental websites. Furthermore, the relationship between evaluated website parameters and country vaccination rates were calculated.
Methods:
By referring to an open dataset hosted at Our World in Data, the 58 countries/regions with the highest total vaccination count as of 8th of July 2021 were identified. Together with the websites from World Health Organization (WHO) and European Commission, a total of 60 vaccination campaign websites were targeted. The “frequently asked questions” or “questions and answers” section of the websites were evaluated in terms of readability, quality, and content stating vaccination duration of protection and potential side effects.
Results:
In respect of readability, the COVID-19 vaccination websites had a mean Flesch Reading Ease score of 41.3, and a mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of 11.9. Only the website of Sweden fulfilled the two widely accepted thresholds of having the former score of at least 60 and the latter score of below 7 (indicating good readability). Only websites of Switzerland and the WHO were Health On the Net Foundation code (HONcode) certified. However, most of the studied websites had a Quality Evaluation Scoring Tool (QUEST) score of at least 11, implying good content quality. Five side effects of the vaccinations were most frequently mentioned, namely fever/chill (85.1%), various injection site discomfort events (e.g., swelling, redness, pain) (83.0%), headache (76.6%), fatigue (70.2%), and muscle/joint pain (66.0%).
Conclusions:
In general, the content quality of most of the evaluated websites was good, but HONcode certification should be considered, content should be written in more readable manner, and a publication date or date of last update should be presented.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.