Health answer quality evaluation by librarians, nurses, and users in social Q&A

Abstract Health information consumers and patients increasingly take an active role in seeking health information online and in sharing their health problems and concerns in online support groups and social media venues. However, they may risk being influenced by unreliable and misleading information in such environments, as no intermediaries monitor the quality of this information. This study focuses on evaluating the quality of health information exchanged in one of the social media venues, by investigating how librarians, nurses, and users assessed the quality of health answers in Yahoo! Answers, a social question-and-answering (Q&A) service. Through statistical analysis differences among the three participant groups, how the background characteristics influenced their assessments, and the relationships between characteristics of the content of answers and quality evaluation criteria were each considered in detail. Librarians and nurses shared similar ratings of answer quality, but had differences in their level of medical knowledge and the types of services they offer, resulting in minor differences across criteria. Users perceived the quality of health answers in social Q&A to be higher than librarians and nurses for almost all criteria. Depending on the sources of information presented in health answers, librarians, nurses, and users gave different quality assessments. Implications exist for research into and practice of evaluating the quality of health information, which need to address both search and domain expertise along with the sharing of socioemotional values preferred by users.