T-Space at The University of Toronto Libraries >
Journal of Medical Internet Research >
Volume 3 (2001) >
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title: ||Review Of Internet Health Information Quality Initiatives|
|Authors: ||Risk, Ahmad|
Social Control, Formal
Health Care Quality
|Issue Date: ||26-Dec-2001|
|Publisher: ||Gunther Eysenbach; Centre for Global eHealth Innovation, Toronto, Canada|
|Citation: ||Ahmad Risk, Joan Dzenowagis. Review Of Internet Health Information Quality Initiatives. J Med Internet Res 2001;3(4):e28 <URL: http://www.jmir.org/2001/4/e28/>|
|Abstract: ||[This item is a preserved copy and is not necessarily the most recent version. To view the current item, visit http://www.jmir.org/2001/4/e28/ ]
The massive growth of health information on the Internet; the global nature of the Internet; the seismic shift taking place in the relationships of various actors in this arena, and the absence of real protection from harm for citizens who use the Internet for health purposes are seen to be real problems. One response to many of these problems has been the burgeoning output of codes of conduct by numerous organizations trying to address quality of health information.
Review the major self-regulatory initiatives in the English-speaking world to develop quality and ethical standards for health information on the Internet. Compare and analyze the approaches taken by the different initiatives. Clarify the issues around the development and enforcement of standards.
Quality initiatives selected meet one or more of the following criteria: Self-regulatory. A reasonable constituency. Diversity (eg, of philosophy, approach and process)-to achieve balance and wide representation, and to illustrate and compare different approaches. Historic value. A wider reach than a national audience, except when its reach is a significant sector of the Internet health information industry.
The initiatives were compared in 3 ways: (1) Analysis and comparison of: key concepts, mechanism, or approach. Analysis of: the obligations that a provider has to meet to comply with the given initiative, the intended beneficiaries of that initiative, and the burdens imposed on different actors. These burdens are described in terms of their effect on the long-term sustainability and maintenance of the initiative by its developers. Analysis of the enforcement mechanisms. (2) Analysis and comparison by type of sponsoring organization, the reach of the initiative, and the sources of funding of the initiative or the sponsoring organization. (3) How the various initiatives fall under 1 of 3 key mechanisms and comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of these key mechanisms.
The issues that affect the initiatives and future work on the quality of health information on the Internet are identified and analyzed. These issues are:
(a) Three key mechanisms used in the quality initiatives (b) Sustainability issues that affect the initiatives: Burdens placed on health information providers, citizens and others. Currency and maintenance issues of the initiatives. Funding. Cost. Acceptance. Market conditions. User indifference or ambivalence. (c) Enforcement issues surrounding the initiatives (d) Adequacy of approach, scope, reach, and enforcement provisions of the various quality initiatives (e) Gaps that need to be addressed to achieve good quality of health information on the internet
Ten conclusions are presented. A framework of action to be undertaken by the World Health Organization in the field of quality of health information on the Internet is recommended.|
|Description: ||Reviewer: Baur, C|
Reviewer: Deering, MJ
Reviewer: Eysenbach, G
|Other Identifiers: ||doi:10.2196/jmir.3.4.e28|
|Rights: ||Copyright (cc) Retained by author(s) under a Creative Commons License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/|
|Appears in Collections:||Volume 3 (2001)|
Items in T-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.