Search results
Jul 16, 2021 · Just as building trust should be a priority for credible sources of health information, ensuring the credibility of highly trusted and influential sources should be of primary concern for SMPs and other stakeholders concerned with public health and health communication.
Feb 8, 2019 · This study aims to characterize health information sources in our ever-expanding digital ecosystem, including nonevidence-based pages presenting information about type 2 diabetes reversal.
- Alla Keselman, Catherine Arnott Smith, Anita C Murcko, David R Kaufman
- 2019
This is particularly important in the health care field, where information is constantly changing as new discoveries are made. To summarize, when assessing accuracy, consider the following: Is the information based on scientific evidence? Is the information supported by facts? Is the original source listed? Do other sources back up the information?
Jun 19, 2017 · The article seeks to present a profile of the research conducted on trust and credibility in WHI seeking, to identify the factors that impact judgments of trustworthiness and credibility, and to explore the role of demographic factors affecting trust formation.
- Laura Sbaffi, Jennifer Rowley
- 10.2196/jmir.7579
- 2017
- J Med Internet Res. 2017 Jun; 19(6): e218.
- Introduction
- Background
- Methods
- Scope
- Key Terms
- Foundational Principles
- Credibility Attributes
- Identifying Credible Sources of Health Information
- Credibility Assessment Steps
- Identifying Credible Sources For Consumers
People seek, share, and receive health information from a wide variety of sources, such as health care professionals, insurance and pharmaceutical companies, family and friends, media, educational materials, advertisements, and the internet—including social media. Increasing numbers of Americans have turned to internet sources for health and medica...
In March 2021, the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) launched a project to help identify principles for identifying credible sources of health information in social media, of which this paper is the principal output. Sponsored by YouTube’s Healthcare and Public Health Partnerships arm [c], the project was inspired by the goal of enhancing public a...
Managing Conflict of Interest
The NAM is an organization whose influence stems in part from its reputation as a credible source of health information. Further, the NAM disseminates this information in part through social media [d]. To minimize conflict of interest (COI), the NAM took steps to ensure the independence and objectivity of the advisory group and this paper. This paper represents the opinions of the authors and does not reflect a consensus position of the NAM, NASEM, or the authors’ organizations. The authors d...
Deliberative Sessions
The authors met for four closed, deliberative sessions between March and June 2021. Representatives from YouTube attended the first 60 minutes of the initial session in order to explain the company’s current policies and future goals with regard to elevating high-quality health information and to answer questions from the authors. Representatives from YouTube did not attend any part of the subsequent deliberative sessions. Notes from all three sessions are available to the public on the proje...
Information-Gathering Public Webinar
On April 5, 2021, the NAM hosted a public webinar to gather information to inform the authors’ deliberations. The webinar was planned with the input of the authors, and all authors attended. The topics covered included background on YouTube’s goals with regard to elevating credible sources of health information; the health and social consequences of social media misinformation and disinformation; how health information is received at the community level; and unintended consequences of social...
Given the complexity of the task—including the volume of health information shared through social media and the controversial nature of evolving content moderation policies—the authors limit their guidance to what they believe is a feasible first step toward enhancing access to high-quality health information. Therefore, this paper focuses on the c...
Terminological precision is critical to this task and was the subject of careful deliberation by the authors. The following are definitions and discussions of the key terms used in this paper.
On the basis of their information gathering and deliberation, the authors developed the following foundational principles to guide identification of credible sources of health information in social media.
Using the foundational principles as a scaffold, the authors identified a set of attributes that generally describe credible sources of health information (see Table 1). Not every source can display every attribute, but this should not preclude a general assessment of credibility. For example, a professional association may have a lobbying arm, whi...
Categorization
A very wide range of U.S. nonprofit or government sources provide health information through social media, including professional societies; health care organizations; public health departments; universities; think tanks; philanthropies; medical journals; grassroots community organizations; state, local, tribal, and territorial government health agencies, and more. The scope and size of these sources varies dramatically. Evaluating the credibility of each one individually, while a worthy even...
Leveraging Pre-Existing, Standardized Vetting Mechanisms
Several categories of sources are subject to pre-existing, standardized vetting mechanisms that indicate general alignment with the authors’ foundational principles and attributes. Therefore, SMPs could consider sources in these categories as likelyto be credible. However, these vetting mechanisms are not an exact match for the principles and attributes and reflect varying degrees of rigor. In addition, there are credibility concerns associated with each of these categories, as noted in the s...
Government Organizations
Federal, state, and local government organizations operate under a number of provisions that support their credibility as sources of health information—primarily in the areas of transparency and accountability. As part of the system of checks and balances built into the U.S. government, the Constitution gives the legislative and judiciary branches oversight over the executive branch, where many federal organizations that serve as sources of health information reside (see Box 7). For example,...
To assess the credibility of sources not subject to preexisting, standardized vetting mechanisms that align with the authors’ principles and attributes, SMPs would need to collect and evaluate a standardized set of data. The means of data collection could be either primary or secondary (i.e., SMPs could undertake their own discovery process or rely...
Given the preliminary nature of the approach described in this paper and lack of insight into the policies and capabilities of SMPs, the authors do not offer an opinion as to whether or how SMPs should “elevate” credible sources of health information (e.g., via an algorithm). However, when it comes to options for identifying such sources for consum...
- Raynard S. Kington, Stacey Arnesen, Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou, Susan J. Curry, David Lazer, Antonia M. Vi...
- 2021
1. Introduction 2. Provider and Purpose 3. Information Quality 4. Privacy 5. Conclusion. 2 Introduction Welcome to the Evaluating Internet Health Information tutorial from the National Library of Medicine. Using the internet to find health information is easier than ever. Sometimes it even finds its way to you when you arent searching for it.
People also ask
Why is inaccurate health information so dangerous?
Is online information a substitute for medical advice?
What factors affect the quality of health information found online?
What constitutes high-quality health information?
Feb 26, 2024 · How do you know if health information you read can be trusted? Evaluating health information helps you know if the source is reliable. Learn more.
