Review of published criteria for evaluating health-related websites.
OBJECTIVE
To review published criteria for specifically evaluating health-related information on the World Wide Web and to identify areas of consensus in evaluation.


METHODS
Search of Web sites and peer-reviewed medical journals for explicit criteria for evaluating health-related information on the Web using Medline and Lexis-Nexis databases and the following Internet search engines: Yahoo!, Excite, Altavista, Webcrawler, HotBot, Infoseek, Magellan Internet Guide, and Lycos. Criteria were extracted and grouped into categories.


RESULTS
Twenty-nine published rating tools and journal articles were identified that had explicit criteria for assessing health-related Web sites. Of the 165 criteria extracted from these tools and articles, 132 (80%) were grouped under 1 of 12 specific categories, and 33 (20%) were grouped as miscellaneous because they lacked specificity or were unique. The most frequently cited criteria were those dealing with the content, design, and aesthetics of a site; disclosure of authors, sponsors, or developers; currency of information (includes frequency of update, freshness, and maintenance of site); authority of source; ease of use; and accessibility and availability.


CONCLUSIONS
Many authors agree on the key criteria for evaluating health-related Web sites and efforts to develop consensus criteria may be helpful. The next step is to identify and assess a clear, simple set of consensus criteria that the general public can understand and use.
Kim
P
P
Health Communication and Telehealth, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence Ave, SW, Room 738G, Washington, DC 20201.
Eng
T R
TR
Deering
M J
MJ
Maxfield
A
A