Umbilical hernia in adults: According to Google, M.D.

Abstract

Background: Patients are increasingly using the internet for health-related information, especially umbilical hernias, according to Google search trends. We aimed to evaluate the quality and readability of information available on the internet regarding umbilical hernia in adults. Methods: We searched on Google, Yahoo and Bing using the keywords “umbilical hernia” AND “adults”. Results from the first two pages were included. We excluded webpages with restricted access, non-text media, and exclusive paediatric content. After removing duplicates, 27 unique webpages were evaluated independently by two co-authors using 3 standard criteria: the DISCERN tool, JAMA benchmarks, and the HON seal. 26 of the webpages (1 page was encrypted) were also scored using FRE, FKGL, and ARI readability scores. The results were then combined and analysed. Results: Inter-rater agreement for DISCERN scores between the two co-authors was good (Weighted Kappa = 0.63 ± 4.6%, CI=95%). Both co-authors agreed on JAMA benchmarks and the HON seal. The average DISCERN score was 43 (53.8%). The average JAMA score was 2.2, with eight (30%) of the 27 unique webpages scoring the maximum of 4 points. The HON seal was present on 8 webpages (30%). The median FRE, FKGL, and ARI scores were 50.0 (IQR= 44.4 – 58.4), 10.2 (IQR = 9.2 - 11.4), and 9.3 (IQR = 8.0 – 10.6) respectively. Six (23%) of the 26 pages met the minimum FRE standard of 60 and ARI standard of 8, while only five (19%) of the webpages met the FKGL standard of 8. There was a strong positive correlation between FKGL and ARI (Spearman rho = 0.947, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Though there are some webpages that provide good quality and easily readable information regarding umbilical hernias, the overall quality and readability is far from ideal.