Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-8371
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHüsch, Tanja-
dc.contributor.authorOber, Sita-
dc.contributor.authorHaferkamp, Axel-
dc.contributor.authorNaumann, Gert-
dc.contributor.authorTunn, Ralf-
dc.contributor.authorSaar, Matthias-
dc.contributor.authorKranz, Jennifer-
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-09T08:59:50Z-
dc.date.available2023-01-09T08:59:50Z-
dc.date.issued2022-
dc.identifier.urihttps://openscience.ub.uni-mainz.de/handle/20.500.12030/8387-
dc.description.abstractPurpose To identify differences in the content and quality of online health information for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) presented in social media and digital search engines to sustainably enhance patient guidance for adequate platforms for seeking online health information on POP. Methods The platforms Google search, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and YouTube were searched for the keyword “pelvic organ prolapse”. Results were categorized as useful, misleading, advertising, and personal experience. Data were categorized into healthcare professionals, professional organisations, industry, patients, and individuals. The readability score and Health On the Net (HON) code seal were analyzed for Google. Descriptive and univariate analysis was performed. Results The source with the highest quantity of useful content was YouTube whereas LinkedIn included mostly advertisement and misleading content. YouTube and Google provided the greatest variety of health information. Social media platforms identified emotional distress and sleep disturbances as a common side effect of POP which is limited considered in clinical practice and provide novel insights of bothersome symptoms related to the disease. The spectrum of different surgical techniques was limited in all platforms. Only 12 (40.0%) were HON-qualified websites with a mean readability score of 10.4 which is considered fairly difficult to read. Conclusion Besides Google search, YouTube was identified as a valuable online source for POP information. However, encompassing information of surgical techniques was limited in all platforms. Urogynecological association may contribute to improve patient information by providing online health information which is complete and easy to understand.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipGefördert durch die Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) - Projektnummer 491381577de
dc.language.isoengde
dc.rightsCC BY*
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subject.ddc610 Medizinde_DE
dc.subject.ddc610 Medical sciencesen_GB
dc.titleComparison of online health information between different digital platforms for pelvic organ prolapseen_GB
dc.typeZeitschriftenaufsatzde
dc.identifier.doihttp://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-8371-
jgu.type.dinitypearticleen_GB
jgu.type.versionPublished versionde
jgu.type.resourceTextde
jgu.organisation.departmentFB 04 Medizinde
jgu.organisation.number2700-
jgu.organisation.nameJohannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz-
jgu.rights.accessrightsopenAccess-
jgu.journal.titleWorld journal of urologyde
jgu.journal.volume40de
jgu.pages.start2529de
jgu.pages.end2534de
jgu.publisher.year2022-
jgu.publisher.nameSpringerde
jgu.publisher.placeBerlin u.a.de
jgu.publisher.issn1433-8726de
jgu.organisation.placeMainz-
jgu.subject.ddccode610de
jgu.publisher.doi10.1007/s00345-022-04129-6de
jgu.organisation.rorhttps://ror.org/023b0x485-
jgu.subject.dfgLebenswissenschaftende
Appears in collections:DFG-491381577-H

Files in This Item:
  File Description SizeFormat
Thumbnail
comparison_of_online_health_i-20221121131545054.pdf555.12 kBAdobe PDFView/Open