An infodemiologic review of internet resources on dental hypersensitivity: A quality and readability assessment.

Abstract

BackgroundThis study aimed to investigate the quality and readability of online English health information about dental sensitivity and how patients evaluate and utilize these web-based information.MethodsThe credibility and readability of health information was obtained from three search engines. We conducted searches in "incognito" mode to reduce the possibility of biases. Quality assessment utilized JAMA benchmarks, the DISCERN tool, and HONcode. Readability was analyzed using the SMOG, FRE, and FKGL indices.ResultsOut of 600 websites, 90 were included, with 62.2% affiliated with dental or medical centers, among these websites, 80% exclusively related to dental implant treatments. Regarding JAMA benchmarks, currency was the most commonly achieved and 87.8% of websites fell into the "moderate quality" category. Word and sentence counts ranged widely with a mean of 815.7 (±435.4) and 60.2 (±33.3), respectively. FKGL averaging 8.6 (±1.6), SMOG scores averaging 7.6 (±1.1), and FRE scale showed a mean of 58.28 (±9.1), with "fair difficult" being the most common category.ConclusionThe overall evaluation using DISCERN indicated a moderate quality level, with a notable absence of referencing. JAMA benchmarks revealed a general non-adherence among websites, as none of the websites met all of the four criteria. Only one website was HON code certified, suggesting a lack of reliable sources for web-based health information accuracy. Readability assessments showed varying results, with the majority being "fair difficult". Although readability did not significantly differ across affiliations, a wide range of the number of words and sentences count was observed between them.