Accepted for/Published in: Interactive Journal of Medical Research
Date Submitted: Sep 21, 2022
Open Peer Review Period: Sep 21, 2022 - Nov 16, 2022
Date Accepted: Nov 17, 2023
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
The quality of websites regarding statins: Evaluation of accuracy, credibility and readability
ABSTRACT
Background:
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) represents the greatest burden of mortality worldwide and statins are the most commonly prescribed drug in its management. A wealth of information pertaining to statins and their side effects is on the internet, however, to date, no assessment of the accuracy, credibility and readability of this information has been undertaken.
Objective:
To evaluate the quality (accuracy, credibility, and readability) of websites likely to be visited by the general public undertaking a Google search of the side effects and utility of statin medications.
Methods:
Following a Google web search, we reviewed the top 20 consumer-focused websites with statins information. Website accuracy, credibility and readability were assessed based on site category (commercial, not-for-profit, media), site rank and presence or absence of the Health On the Net Code of Conduct (HONcode) seal. Accuracy and credibility were assessed following the development of checklists (with 20 and 13 items respectively). Readability was assessed using the Simple Measure of Gobbledegook scores.
Results:
Overall, the accuracy score was low, (x̅ =14.35 out of 20). While side effects were comprehensively covered by 70% of sites, there was little information about statin use in primary and secondary prevention. None of the websites met all criteria on the credibility checklist, (x̅ 7.8 out of 13). The median SMOG score was 9.65, with none of the websites meeting the recommended reading grade of 6, even the media websites. Websites bearing the HONcode seal were relatively more credible than those without it, scoring significantly higher (p=0.004) in credibility (x̅ = 8.9) than sites without the HONcode seal (x̅ = 6).
Conclusions:
The quality of statin-related websites tended to be poor. Though the information contained was accurate, it was not comprehensive, and was presented at a reading level too difficult for the average reader to fully comprehend. As such, consumers risk being uninformed about this pharmacotherapy.
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.