title: Is the Internet a Suitable Patient Resource for Information on Common Radiological Investigations?: Radiology-Related Information on the Internet.
abstract: This study aimed to assess the quality of Internet information about common radiological investigations.
  
  
  
  Four search engines (Google, Bing, Yahoo, and Duckduckgo) were searched using the terms "X-ray," "cat scan," "MRI," "ultrasound," and "pet scan." The first 10 webpage results returned for each search term were recorded, and their quality and readability were analyzed by two independent reviewers (DJB and LCY), with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Analysis of information quality was conducted using validated instruments for the assessment of health-care information (DISCERN score is a multi-domain tool for assessment of health-care information quality by health-care professionals and laypeople (max 80 points)) and readability (Flesch-Kincaid and SMOG or Simple Measure of Gobbledygook scores). The search result pages were further classified into categories as follows: commercial, academic (educational/institutional), and news/magazine. Several organizations offer website accreditation for health-care information, and accreditation is recognized by the presence of a hallmark or logo on the website. The presence of any valid accreditation marks on each website was recorded. Mean scores between groups were compared for significance using the Student t test.
  
  
  
  A total of 200 webpages returned (108 unique website addresses). The average DISCERN score was <50 points for all modalities and search engines. No significant difference was seen in readability between modalities or between search engines. Websites carrying validated accreditation marks were associated with higher average DISCERN scores: X-ray (39.36 vs 25.35), computed tomography (45.45 vs 31.33), and ultrasound (40.91 vs 27.62) (P < .01). Academic/government institutions produced material with higher DISCERN scores: X-ray (40.06 vs 22.23), magnetic resonance imaging (44.69 vs 29), ultrasound (46 vs 31.91), and positron emission tomography (45.93 vs 38.31) (P < .01). Commercial websites produced material with lower mean DISCERN scores: X-ray (17.25 vs 31.69), magnetic resonance imaging (20.8 vs 40.1), ultrasound (24.11 vs 42.35), and positron emission tomography (24.5 vs 44.45) (P < .01).
  
  
  
  Although readability is adequate, the overall quality of radiology-related health-care information on the Internet is poor. High-quality online resources should be identified so that patients may avoid the use of poor-quality information derived from general search engine queries.
authors.affiliation: Galway University Hospital, Department of Radiology, Newcastle Road, Galway, Ireland. Electronic address: dermotbowden@gmail.com.
authors.forename: Dermot J
authors.initials: DJ
authors.lastname: Bowden
authors.affiliation: Galway University Hospital, Department of Radiology, Newcastle Road, Galway, Ireland.
authors.forename: Lee-Chien
authors.initials: LC
authors.lastname: Yap
authors.affiliation: Galway University Hospital, Department of Radiology, Newcastle Road, Galway, Ireland.
authors.forename: Declan G
authors.initials: DG
authors.lastname: Sheppard
mesh_terms: D032882:Comprehension; D058015:Health Communication / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D033181:Information Dissemination / Q000379:methods*; D020407:Internet; D011871:Radiology; D057386:Search Engine
keywords: Internet information; health informatics; health-care information; patient education