Transoral robotic surgery: Differences between online information and academic literature

Evaluate the authorship, content, quality, and readability of information on Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) available to patients online. The technical search term “TORS Surgery” and layperson's term “robotic surgery of the mouth” were utilized to conduct a search of the top 50 websites on Go...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of otolaryngology 2020-07, Vol.41 (4), p.102395, Article 102395
Hauptverfasser: Shetty, Kunal Ramanand, Wong, Kevin, Hashemi, Sean, Shetty, Anisha, Levi, Jessica R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 4
container_start_page 102395
container_title American journal of otolaryngology
container_volume 41
creator Shetty, Kunal Ramanand
Wong, Kevin
Hashemi, Sean
Shetty, Anisha
Levi, Jessica R.
description Evaluate the authorship, content, quality, and readability of information on Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) available to patients online. The technical search term “TORS Surgery” and layperson's term “robotic surgery of the mouth” were utilized to conduct a search of the top 50 websites on Google, Bing, and Yahoo. Websites were evaluated according to the HONcode evaluation of content and quality, and readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Formula, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Formula, SMOG readability formula, Coleman Liau Index formula, and Gunning Fog Index. Statistical analysis was conducted using the Fisher Freeman- Halton test to compare differences in authorship, quality, and content between the three search engines and the Fisher exact test was used to determine if there was a difference in these variables between the two search terms. Overall, websites were predominantly from academic institutions with 97% mentioning benefits of TORS with 24% mentioning risks. 45% of TORS websites had no description of the TORS procedure, while 62% allowed individuals to make appointments. There was a significant difference in authorship with the layperson's terms yielding more news sources, but there were no significant differences in quality and content of information elicited through the technical and layperson search terms. The mean readability scores were Flesch Kincaid Grade Level 13.81(±3.32), Gunning-Fog Index 16.51(±3.39), SMOG 12.53(±2.40), and Automated Readability Index 14.05 (±4.17). Current online information on TORS surgery may not provide balanced information for patients to make informed healthcare decisions. The current readability of online information regarding TORS far exceeds the average literacy level of average American adults.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.amjoto.2020.102395
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2425662425</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0196070919312165</els_id><sourcerecordid>2425662425</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-3da404bdc860d6111a4a5cc120de2fe55056daa096e6477f433defc1963fb56e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kF9rFTEQxYMo9lr9BiILPu91kmxy9_ogSFv_QMGXFupTyCYTyXI3qZOs0m_vLlt99GUGhnPOcH6Mveaw58D1u3FvpzHXvBcg1pOQR_WE7biSou15f_eU7YAfdQsHOJ6xF6WMACA7qZ6zMykA-l72O_b9hmwqmeypoTzkGl1TZvqB9PC-uYwhIGFyWJoB62_E1OR0igmbmEKmydaYU2OTb6yzHqfFfIoVydaZ8CV7Fuyp4KvHfc5uP13dXHxpr799_nrx8bp1Uh1qK73toBu86zV4zTm3nVXOcQEeRUClQGlvLRw16u5wCJ2UHoNbmskwKI3ynL3dcu8p_5yxVDPmmdLy0ohOKK3Xuai6TeUol0IYzD3FydKD4WBWnmY0G0-z8jQbz8X25jF8Hib0_0x_AS6CD5sAl4q_IpIpLq7IfCR01fgc___hD3C6iZM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2425662425</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Transoral robotic surgery: Differences between online information and academic literature</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Shetty, Kunal Ramanand ; Wong, Kevin ; Hashemi, Sean ; Shetty, Anisha ; Levi, Jessica R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Shetty, Kunal Ramanand ; Wong, Kevin ; Hashemi, Sean ; Shetty, Anisha ; Levi, Jessica R.</creatorcontrib><description>Evaluate the authorship, content, quality, and readability of information on Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) available to patients online. The technical search term “TORS Surgery” and layperson's term “robotic surgery of the mouth” were utilized to conduct a search of the top 50 websites on Google, Bing, and Yahoo. Websites were evaluated according to the HONcode evaluation of content and quality, and readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Formula, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Formula, SMOG readability formula, Coleman Liau Index formula, and Gunning Fog Index. Statistical analysis was conducted using the Fisher Freeman- Halton test to compare differences in authorship, quality, and content between the three search engines and the Fisher exact test was used to determine if there was a difference in these variables between the two search terms. Overall, websites were predominantly from academic institutions with 97% mentioning benefits of TORS with 24% mentioning risks. 45% of TORS websites had no description of the TORS procedure, while 62% allowed individuals to make appointments. There was a significant difference in authorship with the layperson's terms yielding more news sources, but there were no significant differences in quality and content of information elicited through the technical and layperson search terms. The mean readability scores were Flesch Kincaid Grade Level 13.81(±3.32), Gunning-Fog Index 16.51(±3.39), SMOG 12.53(±2.40), and Automated Readability Index 14.05 (±4.17). Current online information on TORS surgery may not provide balanced information for patients to make informed healthcare decisions. The current readability of online information regarding TORS far exceeds the average literacy level of average American adults.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0196-0709</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-818X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2020.102395</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32008838</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Authoring ; Authorship ; Evaluation ; FDA approval ; Fog ; Health education ; Hospitals ; Infections ; Internet ; Online health information ; Otolaryngology ; Pain ; Patient education ; Patient education material ; Quality ; Quality assessment ; Readability ; Robotic surgery ; Search engines ; Smog ; Statistical analysis ; Surgery ; Transoral robotic surgery ; Tumors ; Websites</subject><ispartof>American journal of otolaryngology, 2020-07, Vol.41 (4), p.102395, Article 102395</ispartof><rights>2020 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2020. Elsevier Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-3da404bdc860d6111a4a5cc120de2fe55056daa096e6477f433defc1963fb56e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-3da404bdc860d6111a4a5cc120de2fe55056daa096e6477f433defc1963fb56e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjoto.2020.102395$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32008838$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Shetty, Kunal Ramanand</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hashemi, Sean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shetty, Anisha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levi, Jessica R.</creatorcontrib><title>Transoral robotic surgery: Differences between online information and academic literature</title><title>American journal of otolaryngology</title><addtitle>Am J Otolaryngol</addtitle><description>Evaluate the authorship, content, quality, and readability of information on Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) available to patients online. The technical search term “TORS Surgery” and layperson's term “robotic surgery of the mouth” were utilized to conduct a search of the top 50 websites on Google, Bing, and Yahoo. Websites were evaluated according to the HONcode evaluation of content and quality, and readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Formula, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Formula, SMOG readability formula, Coleman Liau Index formula, and Gunning Fog Index. Statistical analysis was conducted using the Fisher Freeman- Halton test to compare differences in authorship, quality, and content between the three search engines and the Fisher exact test was used to determine if there was a difference in these variables between the two search terms. Overall, websites were predominantly from academic institutions with 97% mentioning benefits of TORS with 24% mentioning risks. 45% of TORS websites had no description of the TORS procedure, while 62% allowed individuals to make appointments. There was a significant difference in authorship with the layperson's terms yielding more news sources, but there were no significant differences in quality and content of information elicited through the technical and layperson search terms. The mean readability scores were Flesch Kincaid Grade Level 13.81(±3.32), Gunning-Fog Index 16.51(±3.39), SMOG 12.53(±2.40), and Automated Readability Index 14.05 (±4.17). Current online information on TORS surgery may not provide balanced information for patients to make informed healthcare decisions. The current readability of online information regarding TORS far exceeds the average literacy level of average American adults.</description><subject>Authoring</subject><subject>Authorship</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>FDA approval</subject><subject>Fog</subject><subject>Health education</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Infections</subject><subject>Internet</subject><subject>Online health information</subject><subject>Otolaryngology</subject><subject>Pain</subject><subject>Patient education</subject><subject>Patient education material</subject><subject>Quality</subject><subject>Quality assessment</subject><subject>Readability</subject><subject>Robotic surgery</subject><subject>Search engines</subject><subject>Smog</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Transoral robotic surgery</subject><subject>Tumors</subject><subject>Websites</subject><issn>0196-0709</issn><issn>1532-818X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kF9rFTEQxYMo9lr9BiILPu91kmxy9_ogSFv_QMGXFupTyCYTyXI3qZOs0m_vLlt99GUGhnPOcH6Mveaw58D1u3FvpzHXvBcg1pOQR_WE7biSou15f_eU7YAfdQsHOJ6xF6WMACA7qZ6zMykA-l72O_b9hmwqmeypoTzkGl1TZvqB9PC-uYwhIGFyWJoB62_E1OR0igmbmEKmydaYU2OTb6yzHqfFfIoVydaZ8CV7Fuyp4KvHfc5uP13dXHxpr799_nrx8bp1Uh1qK73toBu86zV4zTm3nVXOcQEeRUClQGlvLRw16u5wCJ2UHoNbmskwKI3ynL3dcu8p_5yxVDPmmdLy0ohOKK3Xuai6TeUol0IYzD3FydKD4WBWnmY0G0-z8jQbz8X25jF8Hib0_0x_AS6CD5sAl4q_IpIpLq7IfCR01fgc___hD3C6iZM</recordid><startdate>20200701</startdate><enddate>20200701</enddate><creator>Shetty, Kunal Ramanand</creator><creator>Wong, Kevin</creator><creator>Hashemi, Sean</creator><creator>Shetty, Anisha</creator><creator>Levi, Jessica R.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20200701</creationdate><title>Transoral robotic surgery: Differences between online information and academic literature</title><author>Shetty, Kunal Ramanand ; Wong, Kevin ; Hashemi, Sean ; Shetty, Anisha ; Levi, Jessica R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-3da404bdc860d6111a4a5cc120de2fe55056daa096e6477f433defc1963fb56e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Authoring</topic><topic>Authorship</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>FDA approval</topic><topic>Fog</topic><topic>Health education</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Infections</topic><topic>Internet</topic><topic>Online health information</topic><topic>Otolaryngology</topic><topic>Pain</topic><topic>Patient education</topic><topic>Patient education material</topic><topic>Quality</topic><topic>Quality assessment</topic><topic>Readability</topic><topic>Robotic surgery</topic><topic>Search engines</topic><topic>Smog</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Transoral robotic surgery</topic><topic>Tumors</topic><topic>Websites</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Shetty, Kunal Ramanand</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hashemi, Sean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shetty, Anisha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levi, Jessica R.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>American journal of otolaryngology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Shetty, Kunal Ramanand</au><au>Wong, Kevin</au><au>Hashemi, Sean</au><au>Shetty, Anisha</au><au>Levi, Jessica R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Transoral robotic surgery: Differences between online information and academic literature</atitle><jtitle>American journal of otolaryngology</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Otolaryngol</addtitle><date>2020-07-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>102395</spage><pages>102395-</pages><artnum>102395</artnum><issn>0196-0709</issn><eissn>1532-818X</eissn><abstract>Evaluate the authorship, content, quality, and readability of information on Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) available to patients online. The technical search term “TORS Surgery” and layperson's term “robotic surgery of the mouth” were utilized to conduct a search of the top 50 websites on Google, Bing, and Yahoo. Websites were evaluated according to the HONcode evaluation of content and quality, and readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Formula, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Formula, SMOG readability formula, Coleman Liau Index formula, and Gunning Fog Index. Statistical analysis was conducted using the Fisher Freeman- Halton test to compare differences in authorship, quality, and content between the three search engines and the Fisher exact test was used to determine if there was a difference in these variables between the two search terms. Overall, websites were predominantly from academic institutions with 97% mentioning benefits of TORS with 24% mentioning risks. 45% of TORS websites had no description of the TORS procedure, while 62% allowed individuals to make appointments. There was a significant difference in authorship with the layperson's terms yielding more news sources, but there were no significant differences in quality and content of information elicited through the technical and layperson search terms. The mean readability scores were Flesch Kincaid Grade Level 13.81(±3.32), Gunning-Fog Index 16.51(±3.39), SMOG 12.53(±2.40), and Automated Readability Index 14.05 (±4.17). Current online information on TORS surgery may not provide balanced information for patients to make informed healthcare decisions. The current readability of online information regarding TORS far exceeds the average literacy level of average American adults.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>32008838</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.amjoto.2020.102395</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0196-0709
ispartof American journal of otolaryngology, 2020-07, Vol.41 (4), p.102395, Article 102395
issn 0196-0709
1532-818X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2425662425
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Authoring
Authorship
Evaluation
FDA approval
Fog
Health education
Hospitals
Infections
Internet
Online health information
Otolaryngology
Pain
Patient education
Patient education material
Quality
Quality assessment
Readability
Robotic surgery
Search engines
Smog
Statistical analysis
Surgery
Transoral robotic surgery
Tumors
Websites
title Transoral robotic surgery: Differences between online information and academic literature
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T22%3A05%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Transoral%20robotic%20surgery:%20Differences%20between%20online%20information%20and%20academic%20literature&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20otolaryngology&rft.au=Shetty,%20Kunal%20Ramanand&rft.date=2020-07-01&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=102395&rft.pages=102395-&rft.artnum=102395&rft.issn=0196-0709&rft.eissn=1532-818X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.amjoto.2020.102395&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2425662425%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2425662425&rft_id=info:pmid/32008838&rft_els_id=S0196070919312165&rfr_iscdi=true