Scholarlink

Background <p>Given the increasing reliance on online health information, this study aimed to systematically assess the quality of German-language eHealth information on head and neck cancer (HNC) related dental care.</p> Methods <p>German-language websites were searched via Google.de, Bing.de/Yahoo.de, and DuckDuckGo.com in February 2025. German-language Youtube-videos were searched in March 2025. Websites were assessed across 4 domains: technical/functional aspects (LIDA-instrument), readability (Flesh-reading-ease-score), comprehensiveness (structured checklist), and quality and risk of bias (DISCERN-instrument). Differences between domains were tested using the Friedman test. Group differences among provider types were examined with one-way ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis tests. YouTube-videos were assessed for comprehensiveness, viewers’ interaction, and viewing rate. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test compared comprehensiveness between Youtube-videos and websites.</p> Results <p>A total of 134 eligible websites and 26 YouTube-videos were included. 63.4% of the websites were operated by private dental practices. All four domains differed significantly from each other (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Websites from private and corporate dental practices or private hospital groups showed significantly lower scores in technical/functional aspects compared with websites from dental societies, regulatory bodies, public institutions, or insurance companies. Overall readability was poor, with the highest scores observed for institutional websites (median 49.0) and the lowest for private practices (median 38.0). Comprehensiveness of patient-oriented information was low, especially among corporate dental practices and private hospital groups (median 5.0). Quality of consumer health information was highest for commercial or non-profit information services (median 29) and lowest for private and corporate dental practices (median 23.0). Only 19.2% of YouTube-videos originated from private dental practices, and exhibited low viewer interaction (median 0.9). No significant difference in comprehensiveness was observed between websites and YouTube-videos (<i>p</i> = 0.924).</p> Conclusions <p>German-language eHealth information on dental care in HNC is generally of low quality. This study highlights the need for standardized, reliable, and patient-oriented online resources to support oral health and quality of life in HNC patients.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

How Reliable is eHealth information on dental care in head and neck cancer? A quality evaluation

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月29日

查看全文
  • Felix Marschner,
  • Ludwig Runkel,
  • Maximilian Range,
  • Clemens Lechte,
  • Annette Wiegand

摘要

Background

Given the increasing reliance on online health information, this study aimed to systematically assess the quality of German-language eHealth information on head and neck cancer (HNC) related dental care.

Methods

German-language websites were searched via Google.de, Bing.de/Yahoo.de, and DuckDuckGo.com in February 2025. German-language Youtube-videos were searched in March 2025. Websites were assessed across 4 domains: technical/functional aspects (LIDA-instrument), readability (Flesh-reading-ease-score), comprehensiveness (structured checklist), and quality and risk of bias (DISCERN-instrument). Differences between domains were tested using the Friedman test. Group differences among provider types were examined with one-way ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis tests. YouTube-videos were assessed for comprehensiveness, viewers’ interaction, and viewing rate. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test compared comprehensiveness between Youtube-videos and websites.

Results

A total of 134 eligible websites and 26 YouTube-videos were included. 63.4% of the websites were operated by private dental practices. All four domains differed significantly from each other (p < 0.001). Websites from private and corporate dental practices or private hospital groups showed significantly lower scores in technical/functional aspects compared with websites from dental societies, regulatory bodies, public institutions, or insurance companies. Overall readability was poor, with the highest scores observed for institutional websites (median 49.0) and the lowest for private practices (median 38.0). Comprehensiveness of patient-oriented information was low, especially among corporate dental practices and private hospital groups (median 5.0). Quality of consumer health information was highest for commercial or non-profit information services (median 29) and lowest for private and corporate dental practices (median 23.0). Only 19.2% of YouTube-videos originated from private dental practices, and exhibited low viewer interaction (median 0.9). No significant difference in comprehensiveness was observed between websites and YouTube-videos (p = 0.924).

Conclusions

German-language eHealth information on dental care in HNC is generally of low quality. This study highlights the need for standardized, reliable, and patient-oriented online resources to support oral health and quality of life in HNC patients.