This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Quality/Credibility of eHealth Information and Trust Issues (531) Consumer & Patient Education and Shared-Decision Making (679) Information Seeking, Information Needs (465) Information Quality in Digital Media (340) Information Retrieval (287)

Published on in Vol 23, No 3 (2021): March

Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/22618, first published .
Using the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients Tool to Assess Patient Information on Appendicitis Websites: Systematic Search and Evaluation

Using the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients Tool to Assess Patient Information on Appendicitis Websites: Systematic Search and Evaluation

Using the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients Tool to Assess Patient Information on Appendicitis Websites: Systematic Search and Evaluation

Authors of this article:

Shahi Ghani1 Author Orcid Image ;   Ka Siu Fan1 Author Orcid Image ;   Ka Hay Fan2 Author Orcid Image ;   Lorenzo Lenti1 Author Orcid Image ;   Dimitri Raptis3 Author Orcid Image
Article Authors Cited by (12) Tweetations (2) Metrics

Journals

  1. Shamil E, North A, Fan K, D'Souza H, Kaladjiska M, D'Souza A. The Quality of Online Information on Cosmetic Injectable Fillers: Current Status. Facial Plastic Surgery 2022;38(02):124 View
  2. Vågenes H, Pranić S. Analysis of the quality, accuracy, and readability of patient information on polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) on the internet available in English: a cross-sectional study. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 2023;21(1) View
  3. Walker H, Ghani S, Kuemmerli C, Nebiker C, Müller B, Raptis D, Staubli S. Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2023;25:e47479 View
  4. Temel M, Erden Y, Bağcıer F. Information Quality and Readability: ChatGPT's Responses to the Most Common Questions About Spinal Cord Injury. World Neurosurgery 2024;181:e1138 View
  5. Annesi T, Steinway C, Oluwole T, Shilly S, Szalda D, Myers R, Chen J, Jan S. Quality of Web-Based Sickle Cell Disease Resources for Health Care Transition: Website Content Analysis. JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting 2023;6:e48924 View
  6. Ko T, Tan D, Fan K. Evaluation of the Quality and Readability of Web-Based Information Regarding Foreign Bodies of the Ear, Nose, and Throat: Qualitative Content Analysis. JMIR Formative Research 2024;8:e55535 View
  7. Chien S, Miller G, Huang I, Cunningham D, Carson D, Gall L, Khan K. Quality assessment of online patient information on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy using the modified Ensuring Quality Information for Patients tool. The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England 2024;106(8):672 View
  8. Şahin M, Keleş A, Özcan R, Doğan Ç, Topkaç E, Akgül M, Yazıci C. Evaluation of information accuracy and clarity: ChatGPT responses to the most frequently asked questions about premature ejaculation. Sexual Medicine 2024;12(3) View
  9. Henriksen S, Konradsen H, Rosenberg J, Fonnes S. Patients’ attitudes toward negative appendectomies and surgery for suspected appendicitis: a qualitative interview study. Surgical Endoscopy 2024;38(9):5130 View
  10. Paran M, Almog A, Dreznik Y, Nesher N, Kravarusic D. A New Era in Medical Information: ChatGPT Outperforms Medical Information Provided by Online Information Sheets About Congenital Malformations. Journal of Pediatric Surgery 2024:161894 View
  11. Shamil E, Ko T, Fan K, Schuster-Bruce J, Jaafar M, Khwaja S, Eynon-Lewis N, D'Souza A, Andrews P. Assessing the Quality and Readability of Online Patient Information: ENT UK Patient Information e-Leaflets versus Responses by a Generative Artificial Intelligence. Facial Plastic Surgery 2024 View
  12. Malak A, Şahin M. How Useful are Current Chatbots Regarding Urology Patient Information? Comparison of the Ten Most Popular Chatbots’ Responses About Female Urinary Incontinence. Journal of Medical Systems 2024;48(1) View