Approximately eight million Americans search for health information online every day [1]. However, the information those health seekers are reading may not be very healthy at all. A new study by the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest recently reported that the information prominently displayed in search engine results was not only misleading and confusing, but dangerous for patients [2]. Case in point: using two safe and effective prescription medications (Crestor and Avandia) as an example, nearly 65% of the first three pages of Google search results came from sites that were biased or contained unverified information. Add to this the fact that most search engine users click on a result within the first three pages of search results [3] and people searching for health information online are likely to be viewing websites that aren’t credible or trustworthy.
At Highlight HEALTH 2.0, guest writer Matthew Krajewski focuses on the importance of information categorization and online health search. In his article Health Web 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0, Matthew discusses health search in the context of internet technology trends. His article echoes the difficulty with search engines today:
Standard search results will require a user to determine for themselves what is a trustworthy source and what is plain spam. RightHealth treats the categorization of health information much like how an editorial health site would treat their articles: insuring results are relevant, trustworthy and of value to the end user.
I wrote about The Trust and Credibility of Healthcare Blogs last year and discussed the Health On the Net (HON) Foundation, a non-profit organization that is attempting to guide the growing community of healthcare providers and consumers on the World Wide Web to sound, reliable medical information and expertise through quality assessment and systematic and stringent peer review. Both Highlight HEALTH and the Highlight HEALTH Web Directory are HONcode accredited.
When searching for health information online, be sure to look for credibility seals, such as accreditation from HON or URAC. Make sure the health information you find is dated and cites references. Ask yourself, does the website link to other sources of credible information? Remember that health information found online is only valuable when that information is correct.
Additional health search resources can be found in theHighlight HEALTH Web Directory.
References
-
Fox S. Online Health Search 2006: Most internet users start at a search engine when looking for health information online. Very few check the source and date of the information they find. Washington (DC): Pew Internet and American Life Project. 2006 Oct 29.
-
Goldberg et al. Insta-Americans: The Empowered (and Imperiled) Health Care Consumer in the Age of Internet Medicine. The Center for Medicine in the Public Interest. 2008 Jan.
-
iProspect Search Engine User Behavior Study. iProspect. 2006 Apr.
Healthcare Vox published an article earlier this week entitled “Is the Medical Blogosphere Dying?”, commenting on the number of well-known medical bloggers leaving the blogosphere. Although I don’t think the medical blogosphere is dying, recent events have been a catalyst for change and it’s definitely undergoing a transformation.
The Blog That Ate Manhattan agrees, saying “I for one do not think that the medical blog is an endangered species”. The article shares some thoughts on medical blogging and some of the things learned over the past few months.
Dr. Dinosaur shares these thoughts:
“Sometimes several blogs disappear within a short span of time, leaving the erroneous impression that the events are somehow connected. The concern about “Who’s next?” isn’t all that different from the forty-five year old man with a neighbor and cousin who each dropped dead of heart attacks in the last two weeks. To the patient, it makes perfect sense to worry that the same thing could happen to him. It’s much easier to see coincidence for what it is when we can take a step back and re-connect with reality.”
A number of healthcare bloggers have expressed their intent to apply for accreditation by the Health On the Net (HON) Foundation. As I’ve written in the past, the HONcode addresses the issue of reliability and credibility of healthcare information found on the internet. There are 8 principles to the HONcode, including sections on authority, privacy, attribution, justifiability and transparency. From the HONcode website:
“The HONcode is not an award system, nor does it intend to rate the quality of the information provided by a Web site. It only defines a set of rules to:
- hold Web site developers to basic ethical standards in the presentation of information;
- help make sure readers always know the source and the purpose of the data they are reading.”
Thus, the HONcode is designed to protect the reader. However, little is offered in the way of protection for the blogger. This isn’t surprising given that people didn’t blog back in 1996 when the HONcode was established. However, given recent events, that is the issue: protection for the anonymous medical blogger.
Liana over at Med Valley High places blogging “within the scope of narrative medicine”, maintaining that it’s a beneficial resource for patients. Dr. Val suggested something similar in her comments here on Highlight HEALTH recently, maintaining that parables are a legitimate teaching tool. The question is, how to communicate to the public that there are very strict rules regarding what doctors can and can’t say on a blog? Names are changed and details are blurred not to dodge privacy laws, but to comply with them. Scalpel reviewed the HIPAA section that he felt applies to medical bloggers and made the following conclusion:
I’m not certain that non-anonymous bloggers should present medical cases at all unless the cases are radically altered or very generalized. If it is known that a physician, nurse, or other healthcare worker practices at a certain facility, for example, then the second requirement [obtains individually identifiable health information relating to an individual] seems to be violated. Similarly, posts stating that a certain patient event occurred “last night” or “last week” seem to be in violation.
Given the recent bad press regarding doctors and blogging, I think he has valid concerns that should be addressed.
Dr. Rob over at Musings of a Distractible Mind has started some dialog on a code of ethics for medical bloggers, creating a new blog, the Medical Blog Code of Ethics, and proposing a draft code for healthcare bloggers. He says that:
While I like the idea of the HONcode (and am still working on becoming certified), I want something less aimed at medical content sites (sites that give advice to non-medical people) and more focused on medical bloggers (medical professionals and patients).
N=1 over at Universal Health gave the current draft a test run - check it out.
Hsien Lei of EyeOnDNA suggests that:
… we also need to look at promoting blogging as a legitimate platform which should be respected and not subject to anyone’s influence except the blogger’s own truth. As long as we are willing to stand behind our words, we should face no fear of repercussions.
Indeed, I couldn’t agree more. I encourage everyone to read the draft code over at Medical Blog Code of Ethics and contribute your thoughts.
Share on Facebook
Add to Connotea
Stumble it
add to delicious
Loading ...
