Back

Evaluating Online Educational Resources for Osteogenesis Imperfecta: Insights from Google, Bing, and ChatGPT3.5

Partin, V. P.; Hooberman-Pineiro, A. M.; Pace, A. A.

2025-02-12 health systems and quality improvement
10.1101/2025.02.09.25321967 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundOsteogenesis Imperfecta is a rare connective tissue disorder resulting in a diverse range of musculoskeletal deformities. Patient education is an important aspect of medical care, and the internet is a popular place in which patients seek information about their medical conditions. This is a cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the quality of online patient educational websites about Osteogenesis Imperfecta. MethodsThe authors searched for patient education websites using Google and Bing. Twenty patient education websites about Osteogenesis Imperfecta were collected from each. Websites meeting inclusion criteria were evaluated using the DISCERN tool, JAMA Benchmark Criteria evaluation, and a Flesch-Kincaid Readability test. T-tests were used to compare search engine results. Websites were also collected from ChatGPT3.5, however, due to hallucinations and exclusion criteria, the sample size was too small to compare to the search engines. ResultsNo significant differences were found between search engines, and the quality of the websites was not high. Average overall ratings for DISCERN were mediocre, and for the JAMA criteria they were low. The average readability scores required 8-9 grade level reading comprehension, although there was variability within each search engine. ConclusionNeither search engine provided significantly better sources than the other, the overall quality of the websites was not high, and the low readability scores could make these difficult for patients with lower health literacy to understand

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 3%
28.9%
2
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.6%
50% of probability mass above
3
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 3%
7.5%
4
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.5%
5
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.8%
6
Journal of Personalized Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.9%
7
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.2%
8
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.8%
9
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
10
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.6%
11
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
12
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.4%
13
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 68%
1.0%
14
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
16 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
15
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
16
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
17
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
18
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
19
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
20
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
21
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
22
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
23
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.7%
24
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%
25
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%