Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Female urinary incontinence health information quality on the Internet: a multilingual evaluation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The quality of Internet information on female urinary incontinence is considered variable. No comprehensive analysis exists to support this. We compared the quality of current Internet information for common layperson terminology on female urinary incontinence across four Western languages and a comparative analysis of website sponsors.

Methods

World Health Organization Health on the Net (HON) principles may be applied to websites using an automated toolbar function. We used the Google search engine; 10,200 websites were identified using keywords related to female urinary incontinence and treatments in English, French, German and Spanish. The first 150 websites in each language had HON principles examined, whilst a further analysis of site sponsorship was undertaken.

Results

The total number of websites for each term is variable. “Female sling surgery” had the most websites with approximately 18 million, whereas “colposuspension” had the least with only 159,890 websites. Regardless of language, very few female urinary incontinence websites were HON accredited (p < 0.0001). Linguistically, French (18 %) and English (16 %) had the greatest percentage of HON-accredited sites. Tertiles (thirds) of the first 150 websites returned the higher percentage of HON-accredited websites (p < 0.0001). Websites were largely sponsored by physicians/surgeons.

Conclusions

The lack of validation of most female urinary incontinence websites should be appreciated by clinicians. Additionally, discrepancies exist in the quality and number of websites across conditions, languages and also between medical and alternative terms. Clinicians should participate in and encourage the development of informative, ethical and reliable health websites on the Internet and direct patients to them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

HON:

Health on the Net Foundation

PoHONA:

Percentage of HON-accredited sites

HONcode:

Toolbar function that allows recognition of accreditation of a website by HON principles

WHO:

World Health Organization

References

  1. Menon AM, Deshpande AD, Perri M 3rd, Zinkhan GM (2002) Trust in online prescription drug information among internet users: the impact on information search behavior after exposure to direct-to-consumer advertising. Health Mark Q 20:17–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Zickuhr K, Smith A (2012) Digital differences. http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/04/13/digital-differences/. Accessed 14 May 2014

  3. Fox S (2011) The social life of health information. Pew research center. http://www.pewinternet.org/2011/05/12/the-social-life-of-health-information-2011/. Accessed 14 May 2014

  4. DaJusta DG, Mueller TJ, Barone JG (2008) Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competency-based on-line computer course in pediatric oncology for urology residents. Urology 71:818–820

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Minaglia S, Kaneshiro B, Soules K, Harvey S, Grzankowski K, Millet L, Oyama I (2012) Assessment if internet-based information regarding pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 18:50–54

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sajadi K, Goldman H, Firoozi F (2011) Accessing Internet health information on female pelvic floor disorders. J Urol 186:594–596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, van Kerrebroeck P, Victor A, Wein A et al (2002) The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 21:167–178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fagerlin A, Wang C, Ubel PA (2005) Reducing the influence of anecdotal reasoning on people’s health care decisions: is a picture worth a thousand statistics? Med Decis Making 25:398–405

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ubel PA, Jepson C, Baron J (2001) The inclusion of patient testimonials in decision aids: effects on treatment choices. Med Decis Making 21:60–68

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Brown LK, Fenner DE, Berger MB, Delancey JL, Morgan DM, Patel DA, Schimpf MO (2013) Defining patients’ knowledge and perceptions of vaginal mesh surgery. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 19:282–287

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Kaimal AJ, Cheng YW, Bryant AS, Norton ME, Shaffer BL, Caughey AB (2008) Google obstetrics: who is educating our patients? Am J Obstet Gynecol 198(6):682.e1–682.e5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lawrentschuk N, Abouassaly R, Hackett N, Groll R, Fleshner NE (2009) Health information quality on the internet in urological oncology: a multilingual longitudinal evaluation. Urology 74:1058–1063

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lawrentschuk N, Sasges D, Tasevski R, Abouassaly R, Scott AM, Davis ID (2012) Oncology health information quality on the Internet: a multilingual evaluation. Ann Surg Oncol 19:706–713

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Chen E, Manecksha R, Abouassaly R, Lawrentschuk N (2014) Health information quality on the internet for benign prostatic hyperplasia and its treatment: a multilingual evaluation. Prostate Int, in press

  15. Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, Algazy JI, Kravitz RL, Broder MS, Kanouse DE, Muñoz JA, Puyol JA, Lara M, Watkins KE, Yang H, McGlynn EA (2001) Health information on the Internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA 285:2612–2621

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Alkhateeb S, Lawrentschuk N (2011) Consumerism and its impact on robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 108:1874–1878

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Health on the Net Foundation (2008) HONcode of conduct (HONcode) for medical and health web sites. World Health Organization. http://www.Hon.Ch/honcode/. Accessed 13 Mar 2014

  18. Wong LM, Yan H, Margel D, Fleshner NE (2013) Urologists in cyberspace: a review of the quality of health information from American urologists’ websites using three validated tools. CUAJ 7:100–106

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Gaudinat A, Grabar N, Boyer C (2007) Machine learning approach for automatic quality criteria detection of health web pages. Stud Health Technol Inform 129:705–709

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Eysenbach G, Köhler C (2002) How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ 324:573–577

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Smith RP, Devine P, Jones H, DeNittis A, Whittington R, Metz JM (2003) Internet use by patients with prostate cancer undergoing radiotherapy. Urology 62:273–277

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Pew Research Internet and American Life Project (2010) Health fact sheet. Pew Research Center. http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/health-fact-sheet. Accessed 26 May 2014

  23. Tennstedt SL, Link CL, Steers WD, McKinlay JB (2008) Prevalence of and risk factors for urine leakage in a racially and ethnically diverse population of adults: the Boston Area Community Health (BACH) Survey. Am J Epidemiol 167:390–399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Laversin S, Baujard V, Gaudinat A, Simonet MA, Boyer C (2011) Improving the transparency of health information found on the internet through honcode: a comparative study. Stud Health Technol Inform 169:654–658

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kakos AB, Lovejoy DA, Whiteside JL (2015) Quality of information on pelvic organ prolapse on the Internet. Int Urogynecol J 26:551–555

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nathan Lawrentschuk.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saraswat, I., Abouassaly, R., Dwyer, P. et al. Female urinary incontinence health information quality on the Internet: a multilingual evaluation. Int Urogynecol J 27, 69–76 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2742-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2742-5

Keywords

Navigation