Educating Medical Students to Evaluate the Quality of Health Information on the Web

  • Pietro Ghezzi
  • Sundeep Chumber
  • Tara Brabazon
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 358)


Google and googling pose an array of challenges for information professionals. The Google search engine deskills information literacy, so that many people can find some information. Yet the great challenge is knowing what we do not know. We cannot put words into Google that we do not know. Therefore the instruments for diagnosis are blunt and brutal. The field of e-health has great possibilities, yet the lack of information literacy undermines the expertise of professionals and creates misinformation and confusion. This chapter analyzes the means of assessing the quality of health information and describes an approach to improve the ability of medical students to navigate through the various health information available and to critically evaluate a research publication. Improving Internet literacy is required not only to meet the standards for medical education but also to prepare future doctors to deal with patients exposed to an information overload.


Health Information Press Release General Medical Council Scientific Misconduct Dimethyl Fumarate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We thank Nikoo Aziminia for giving her permission to quote part of her essay.


  1. Andreassen, H. K., Bujnowska-Fedak, M. M., Chronaki, C. E., Dumitru, R. C., Pudule, I., Santana, S., et al. (2007). European citizens’ use of E-health services: A study of seven countries. BMC Public Health, 7, 53. PubMed PMID: 17425798. Pubmed Central PMCID: 1855923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anti-ageing drug breakthrough (2013, August 24). Available from:
  3. Berland, G. K., Elliott, M. N., Morales, L. S., Algazy, J. I., Kravitz, R. L., Broder, M. S., et al. (2001). Health information on the Internet: Accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 285(20), 2612–2621. PubMed PMID: 11368735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernstam, E. V., Shelton, D. M., Walji, M., & Meric-Bernstam, F. (2005). Instruments to assess the quality of health information on the World Wide Web: What can our patients actually use? International Journal of Medical Informatics, 74(1), 13–19. PubMed PMID: 15626632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bichakjian, C. K., Schwartz, J. L., Wang, T. S., Hall, J. M., Johnson, T. M., & Biermann, J. S. (2002). Melanoma information on the Internet: Often incomplete – A public health opportunity? Journal of Clinical Oncology, 20(1), 134–141. PubMed PMID: 11773162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brabazon, T. (2007). The University of Google: Education in the (post) information age. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  7. Bruce-Brand, R. A., Baker, J. F., Byrne, D. P., Hogan, N. A., & McCarthy, T. (2013). Assessment of the quality and content of information on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on the internet. Arthroscopy, 29(6), 1095–1100. PubMed PMID: 23582738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charnock, D., Shepperd, S., Needham, G., & Gann, R. (1999). DISCERN: An instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 53(2), 105–111. PubMed PMID: 10396471. Pubmed Central PMCID: 1756830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Croft, D. R., & Peterson, M. W. (2002). An evaluation of the quality and contents of asthma education on the World Wide Web. Chest, 121(4), 1301–1307. PubMed PMID: 11948066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crossley, L. (2013). New drug being developed using compound found in red wine ‘could help humans live until they are 150’ [cited 2013, August 24]. Available from:
  11. Deshpande, A., & Jadad, A. R. (2009). Trying to measure the quality of health information on the internet: Is it time to move on? The Journal of Rheumatology, 36(1), 1–3. PubMed PMID: 19208527.Google Scholar
  12. Estrada, C. A., Hryniewicz, M. M., Higgs, V. B., Collins, C., & Byrd, J. C. (2000). Anticoagulant patient information material is written at high readability levels. Stroke, 31(12), 2966–2970. PubMed PMID: 11108757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Evans, J. A., & Foster, J. G. (2011). Metaknowledge. Science, 331(6018), 721–725. PubMed PMID: 21311014. Epub 2011/02/12. eng.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eysenbach, G., Powell, J., Kuss, O., & Sa, E. R. (2002). Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: A systematic review. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 287(20), 2691–2700. PubMed PMID: 12020305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Falagas, M. E., Ntziora, F., Makris, G. C., Malietzis, G. A., & Rafailidis, P. I. (2009). Do PubMed and Google searches help medical students and young doctors reach the correct diagnosis? A pilot study. European Journal of Internal Medicine, 20(8), 788–790. PubMed PMID: 19892310. Epub 2009/11/07. eng.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fox, S., & Jones, S. (2009). The social life of health information (pp. 1–72). Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.Google Scholar
  17. Friedman, D. B., Hoffman-Goetz, L., & Arocha, J. F. (2004). Readability of cancer information on the internet. Journal of Cancer Education, 19(2), 117–122. PubMed PMID: 15456669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gawande, A., & Bates, D. (2000). The use of information technology in improving medical performance. Part III. Patient support tools. Med Gen Med., 2, E12.Google Scholar
  19. GMC. (2009). Tomorrow’s doctors: Outcomes and standards for undergraduate medical education. London: The General Medical Council.Google Scholar
  20. Guada, J., & Venable, V. (2011). A comprehensive analysis of the quality of online health-related information regarding schizophrenia. Health & Social Work, 36(1), 45–53. PubMed PMID: 21446608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hanauer, D. A., Fortin, J., Dibble, E., & Col, N. F. (2003). Use of the internet for seeking health care information among young adults. AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings, 2003, 857.Google Scholar
  22. Hanif, F., Read, J. C., Goodacre, J. A., Chaudhry, A., & Gibbs, P. (2009). The role of quality tools in assessing reliability of the internet for health information. Informatics for Health & Social Care, 34(4), 231–243. PubMed PMID: 19919300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harland, J., & Bath, P. (2007). Assessing the quality of websites providing information on multiple sclerosis: Evaluating tools and comparing sites. Health Informatics Journal, 13(3), 207–221. PubMed PMID: 17711882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Health on the net foundation. A decade devoted to improving online health information quality [updated June 29th 2009; cited 2013 February 10th]. Available from:
  25. Health on the net foundation. The HON code of conduct for medical and health web sites (HONcode) [updated Feb 4th 2013; cited 2013 February 10th]. Available from:
  26. Hider, P. N., Griffin, G., Walker, M., & Coughlan, E. (2009). The information-seeking behavior of clinical staff in a large health care organization. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 97(1), 47–50. PubMed PMID: 19159006. Epub 2009/01/23. eng.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hubbard, B. P., Gomes, A. P., Dai, H., Li, J., Case, A. W., Considine, T., et al. (2013). Evidence for a common mechanism of SIRT1 regulation by allosteric activators. Science, 339(6124), 1216–1219. PubMed PMID: 23471411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ioannidis, J. P. (2006). Concentration of the most-cited papers in the scientific literature: Analysis of journal ecosystems. PLoS One, 1, e5. PubMed PMID: 17183679. Epub 2006/12/22. eng.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jadad, A. R., & Gagliardi, A. (1998). Rating health information on the Internet: Navigating to knowledge or to Babel? JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 279(8), 611–614. PubMed PMID: 9486757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kunst, H., & Khan, K. S. (2002). Quality of web-based medical information on stable COPD: Comparison of non-commercial and commercial websites. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 19(1), 42–48. PubMed PMID: 12075849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee, C., Gray, S., & Lewis, N. (2010). Internet use leads cancer patients to be active health care consumers. Patient Education and Counseling, 81(Suppl), S63–S69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lindberg, D. A., & Humphreys, B. L. (1998). Medicine and health on the Internet: The good, the bad, and the ugly. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 280(15), 1303–1304. PubMed PMID: 9794299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lopez-Jornet, P., & Camacho-Alonso, F. (2009). The quality of internet sites providing information relating to oral cancer. Oral Oncology, 45(9), e95–e98. PubMed PMID: 19457707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lorig, K. R., Ritter, P. L., Laurent, D. D., & Plant, K. (2008). The internet-based arthritis self-management program: A one-year randomized trial for patients with arthritis or fibromyalgia. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 59(7), 1009–1017. PubMed PMID: 18576310. Epub 2008/06/26. eng.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lorig, K., Ritter, P. L., Laurent, D. D., Plant, K., Green, M., Jernigan, V. B., et al. (2010). Online diabetes self-management program: A randomized study. Diabetes Care, 33(6), 1275–1281. PubMed PMID: 20299481. Epub 2010/03/20. eng.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lustria, M. L. A. (2007). Can interactivity make a difference? Effects of interactivity on the comprehension of and attitudes toward online health content. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(6), 766–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Maloney, S., Ilic, D., & Green, S. (2005). Accessibility, nature and quality of health information on the Internet: A survey on osteoarthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford), 44(3), 382–385. PubMed PMID: 15572390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Martins, E. N., & Morse, L. S. (2005). Evaluation of internet websites about retinopathy of prematurity patient education. The British Journal of Ophthalmology, 89(5), 565–568. PubMed PMID: 15834086. Pubmed Central PMCID: 1772623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McKay, H., Feil, E., Glasgow, R., & Brown, J. (1998). Feasibility and use of an internet support service for diabetes. The Diabetes Educator, 24, 174–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McKay, H. G., King, D., Eakin, E. G., Seeley, J. R., & Glasgow, R. E. (2001). The diabetes network internet-based physical activity intervention: A randomized pilot study. Diabetes Care, 24(8), 1328–1334. PubMed PMID: 11473065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Meric, F., Bernstam, E. V., Mirza, N. Q., Hunt, K. K., Ames, F. C., Ross, M. I., et al. (2002). Breast cancer on the world wide web: Cross sectional survey of quality of information and popularity of websites. BMJ, 324(7337), 577–581. PubMed PMID: 11884322. Pubmed Central PMCID: 78995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mukherjee, S., Lekli, I., Gurusamy, N., Bertelli, A. A., & Das, D. K. (2009). Expression of the longevity proteins by both red and white wines and their cardioprotective components, resveratrol, tyrosol, and hydroxytyrosol. Free Radical Biology & Medicine, 46(5), 573–578. PubMed PMID: 19071213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nalliah, S., Chan, S. L., Ong, C. L., Suthan, T. H., Tan, K. C., She, V. N., et al. (2010). Effectiveness of the use of internet search by third year medical students to establish a clinical diagnosis. Singapore Medical Journal, 51(4), 332–338. PubMed PMID: 20505913. Epub 2010/05/28. eng.Google Scholar
  44. Nasser, S., Mullan, J., & Bajorek, B. (2012). Assessing the quality, suitability and readability of internet-based health information about warfarin for patients. Australasian Medical Journal, 5(3), 194–203. PubMed PMID: 22952566. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3433734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. National Center for Biotechnology Information USNLoM (2005). PubMed Help. Bethesda. Available from:
  46. Ni Riordain, R., & McCreary, C. (2009). Head and neck cancer information on the internet: Type, accuracy and content. Oral Oncology, 45(8), 675–677. PubMed PMID: 19095486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Peterlin, B. L., Gambini-Suarez, E., Lidicker, J., & Levin, M. (2008). An analysis of cluster headache information provided on internet websites. Headache, 48(3), 378–384. PubMed PMID: 18005143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Price, S. L., & Hersh, W. R. (1999). Filtering Web pages for quality indicators: an empirical approach to finding high quality consumer health information on the World Wide Web. Proceedings of the AMIA Symposium, 911–915. PubMed PMID: 10566493. Pubmed Central PMCID: 2232852.Google Scholar
  49. Rees, C. E., Ford, J. E., & Sheard, C. E. (2002). Evaluating the reliability of DISCERN: A tool for assessing the quality of written patient information on treatment choices. Patient Education and Counseling, 47(3), 273–275. PubMed PMID: 12088606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Renear, A. H., & Palmer, C. L. (2009). Strategic reading, ontologies, and the future of scientific publishing. Science, 325(5942), 828–832. PubMed PMID: 19679805. Epub 2009/08/15. eng.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sajid, M. S., Iftikhar, M., Monteiro, R. S., Miles, A. F., Woods, W. G., & Baig, M. K. (2008). Internet information on colorectal cancer: Commercialization and lack of quality control. Colorectal Disease, 10(4), 352–356. PubMed PMID: 17645570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Silberg, W. M., Lundberg, G. D., & Musacchio, R. A. (1997). Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor – Let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 277(15), 1244–1245. PubMed PMID: 9103351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Siliquini, R., Ceruti, M., Lovato, E., Bert, F., Bruno, S., De Vito, E., et al. (2011). Surfing the internet for health information: An Italian survey on use and population choices. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 11, 21. PubMed PMID: 21470435. Epub 2011/04/08. eng.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sim, M. G., Khong, E., & Jivva, M. (2008). Does general practice Google? Australian Family Physician, 37(6), 471–474.Google Scholar
  55. van der Marel, S., Duijvestein, M., Hardwick, J. C., van den Brink, G. R., Veenendaal, R., Hommes, D. W., et al. (2009). Quality of web-based information on inflammatory bowel diseases. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, 15(12), 1891–1896. PubMed PMID: 19462423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wagner, T., Baker, L., Bundorf, M., & Singer, S. (2004). Use of the internet for health information by the chronically ill. Preventing Chronic Disease, 1(4), A13.Google Scholar
  57. Weed, L. L. (1997). New connections between medical knowledge and patient care. BMJ, 315(7102), 231–235. PubMed PMID: 9253272. Pubmed Central PMCID: 2127165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Weiss, E., & Moore, K. (2003). An assessment of the quality of information available on the internet about the IUD and the potential impact on contraceptive choices. Contraception, 68(5), 359–364. PubMed PMID: 14636940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wilson, P. (2002). How to find the good and avoid the bad or ugly: A short guide to tools for rating quality of health information on the internet. BMJ, 324(7337), 598–602. PubMed PMID: 11884329. Pubmed Central PMCID: 1122517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Winker, M. A., Flanagin, A., Chi-Lum, B., White, J., Andrews, K., Kennett, R. L., et al. (2000). Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet: Principles governing AMA web sites. American Medical Association. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 283(12), 1600–1606. PubMed PMID: 10735398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Clinical and Laboratory InvestigationBrighton & Sussex Medical SchoolFalmerUK
  2. 2.School of Teacher EducationCharles Sturt UniversityBathurstAustralia

Personalised recommendations