Do anxiety websites have the answers people are looking for? |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada;2. Centre for the Advancement of Teaching and Learning, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada;3. Department of Clinical Health Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada;1. Research Institute Diabetes Academy Mergentheim (FIDAM), Johann-Hammer-Str. 24, 97980 Bad Mergentheim, Germany;2. Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Bamberg, Markusplatz 3, 96047 Bamberg, Germany;1. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany;2. Biomedical Research in End-Stage and Obstructive Lung Disease (BREATH), German Lung Research Center (DZL), Hannover, Germany;1. Department of Endocrinology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shandong First Medical University & Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, Jinan, China;2. Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK;3. Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, King’s College London, London, UK;1. Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University, Institute of Psychology, Warsaw, Poland;2. SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Katowice, Poland;3. Institute of Psychology of Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland;1. Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States;2. Department of Pediatrics, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, United States |
| |
| Abstract: | Objectives and methodsA wealth of online anxiety information exists but much of it is not evidence-based or well-balanced. This study evaluated anxiety websites (N = 20) on readability, quality, usability, visual design, and content.ResultsOverall, websites were of reasonable quality but only half were considered understandable according to the PEMAT usability scale (70% cutoff value). The average reading level across websites was 11.2 (SMOG), which is higher than NIH recommended grade 6–7 level. Websites had variable design features and a trending association suggested websites with better design come up earlier in search results. The number of topics covered varied across websites and most did not adequately cover all topics of interest. Most websites included information about psychological and self-help treatments, how treatment works, and what treatment entails. The Top 5 websites were: (1) Anxiety BC, (2) ADAA, (3) Mind, (4) Beyond Blue, and (5) Web MD.ConclusionsThis is the first study to evaluate existing anxiety information websites based on the dimensions described above and their relationship to Google search results.Practice implicationsThis study highlights the importance of considering several dimensions in developing mental health resources and provides direction for strategies to improve existing websites and/or develop new resources. |
| |
| Keywords: | Patient education Anxiety Internet Websites Information quality Treatment decision making |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
