• David Truumees, Ashley Duncan, Amin Kunj, Dayal Rajagopalan, Matthew Geck, Devender Singh, John Stokes, and Eeric Truumees.
• University of California, Berkeley.
• Spine. 2022 May 1; 47 (9): E399E406E399-E406.

Study DesignCross-sectional analysis.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the quality and accuracy of the content surrounding cervical radiculopathy available on the internet.Summary Of Background DataThose experiencing cervical radiculopathy and their families are increasingly browsing the worldwide web for medical information. As the information offered is likely to influence their health care choices, spine care providers must understand the quality and accuracy of that information.MethodsIndependent searches were conducted on the three most commonly accessed search engines (Google, Yahoo, and Bing) using the keyword "cervical radiculopathy." The searches were performed on June 28th, 2019. The top 50 sites from each search engines were reviewed. The websites were evaluated using quality, accuracy and usability markers.ResultsSeventy-seven unique websites were analyzed; 54.5% were physician or medical group professional sites, 20.8% as non-physician, 10.4% as unidentified, 7.8% as academics, and 6.5% were commercial. Accuracy ranged from <25% to >75% were recorded with a mean accuracy of 3.5 signifying 50% to 75% agreement. Overall, website categories had a significant effect on Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) score, content quality, accuracy, total summary scores, distraction index, reading ease, and grade level (P  < 0.05). Academic sites had the highest mean quality content, accuracy and total summary scores. Four of the top five websites with the highest total summary scores were physician driven. On average, Health on the Net code (HONcode) certified websites had lower grade level readability with greater reading ease and higher DISCERN and JAMA scores than uncertified sites (P < 0.05).ConclusionDespite the wide number of sources available, the quality, accuracy, pertinence, and intelligibility of the information remains highly variable. Clinicians treating patients with cervical radiculopathy should direct them to verifiable sites with regulated information and, where possible, contribute high- quality information to those sites.Level of Evidence: 4.Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

8 keywords...

hide…