These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Back pain online: a cross-sectional survey of the quality of web-based information on low back pain.
    Author: Butler L, Foster NE.
    Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Feb 15; 28(4):395-401. PubMed ID: 12590218.
    Abstract:
    STUDY DESIGN: A cross section of Web sites accessible to the general public was surveyed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the quality of information on low back pain and its treatment that a "typical" patient user might access on the Internet. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Individuals with back pain have a desire to learn about their condition, what to expect, and what they can do about it. Web sites play a potentially useful role in providing information to help people learn about their low back pain and select the most appropriate methods of management. METHODS: A general search using popular search engines located 60 Web sites about back pain for review. A list of criteria for evaluating and scoring back pain Web sites was established using available literature and current clinical guidelines for the management of acute low back pain. The total quality score (maximum score, 38) was composed of two separate scores: one for general quality of the site (maximum score, 14) and one for site content specific to low back pain (maximum score, 24). Statistical tests, as appropriate, were used to investigate the relation between general indicators of Web site quality and total scores obtained. RESULTS: The quality of the Web sites surveyed was poor, most of them (n = 58, 97%) scoring less than half the maximum available score. The mean total score was 7.4 (range, 2-25). The mean score was 4.9 (range, 1-12) for general Web site quality and 2.4 (range, 1-13) for content specific to low back pain. Web sites providing references, sites created more recently, and sites not created for advertising purposes tended to be of better quality. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlighted the poor quality of information, particularly information about low back pain, available to "typical" patient users on the Internet. Health care professionals must have a role in evaluating existing information and in developing good-quality evidence-based Web sites. Patients with back pain should be discouraged from using the Internet as a source of information unless the Web sites they access have been evaluated and found to provide evidence-based messages.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]