The Impact of Inaccurate Internet Health Information in a Secondary School Learning Environment

Background Patients in the United States commonly use the Internet to acquire health information. While a significant amount of health-related information is available on the Internet, the accuracy of this information is highly variable. Objectives The objective of the study was to determine how effectively students can assess the accuracy of Internet-based material when gathering information on a controversial medical topic using simple keyword searches. Methods A group of 34 students from the science magnet high school in Houston, Texas searched for the terms “vaccine safety” and “vaccine danger” using Google and then answered questions regarding the accuracy of the health information on the returned sites. The students were also asked to describe the lessons they learned in the exercise and to answer questions regarding the strength of evidence for seven statements regarding vaccinations. Because of the surprising revelation that the majority of students left the exercise with inaccurate information concerning the safety and efficacy of vaccines, these same students participated in a follow-up study in which a fact-based vaccine video was shown, after which the assessment of student knowledge was repeated. Results Of the 34 participants, 20 (59%) thought that the Internet sites were accurate on the whole, even though over half of the links (22 out of 40, 55%) that the students viewed were, in fact, inaccurate on the whole. A high percentage of the students left the first exercise with significant misconceptions about vaccines; 18 of the 34 participants (53%) reported inaccurate statements about vaccines in the lessons they learned. Of the 41 verifiable facts about vaccines that were reported by participants in their lessons-learned statement, 24 of those facts (59%) were incorrect. Following presentation of the film, the majority of students left the exercise with correct information about vaccines, based on their lessons-learned statement. In this case, 29 of the 31 participants (94%) reported accurate information about vaccines. Of the 49 verifiable facts about vaccines that were reported by participants, only 2 (4%) were incorrect. Students had higher correct scores in the “strength of evidence” exercise following exposure to the video as well. Conclusions Allowing students to use the Internet to gain information about medical topics should be approached with care since students may take away predominantly incorrect information. It is important to follow up conflicting information with a solid, unambiguous message that communicates those lessons that the instructor deems most important. This final message should be fact based but may need to contain an anecdotal component to counter the strong emotional message that is often delivered by inaccurate Internet sites.

[1]  M. Winker,et al.  Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet: principles governing AMA web sites. American Medical Association. , 2000, JAMA.

[2]  S. Calandrillo Vanishing Vaccinations: Why Are So Many Americans Opting Out of Vaccinating Their Children? , 2005, University of Michigan journal of law reform. University of Michigan. Law School.

[3]  Alejandro R Jadad,et al.  Examination of instruments used to rate quality of health information on the internet: chronicle of a voyage with an unclear destination , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[4]  M. Wolf,et al.  Health literacy: implications for family medicine. , 2004, Family medicine.

[5]  Michael D. Slater,et al.  Scientese and Ambiguous Citations in the Selling of Unproven Medical Treatments , 2004, Health communication.

[6]  R. Jacobson,et al.  Understanding those who do not understand: a brief review of the anti-vaccine movement. , 2001, Vaccine.

[7]  Paul Kim,et al.  Published criteria for evaluating health related web sites: review , 1999, BMJ.

[8]  Manish Latthe,et al.  Accuracy of information on apparently credible websites: survey of five common health topics , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  Maurizio Bonati,et al.  Follow up of quality of public oriented health information on the world wide web: systematic re-evaluation , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[10]  Elizabeth Sillence,et al.  A framework for understanding trust factors in web-based health advice , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[11]  Christian Köhler,et al.  How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  Kylie A. Williams,et al.  How do Consumers Search for and Appraise Information on Medicines on the Internet? A Qualitative Study Using Focus Groups , 2003, Journal of medical Internet research.

[13]  Don Fallis,et al.  Research Paper: Indicators of Accuracy of Consumer Health Information on the Internet: A Study of Indicators Relating to Information for Managing Fever in Children in the Home , 2002, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[14]  V P Abbott,et al.  Web page quality: can we measure it and what do we find? A report of exploratory findings. , 2000, Journal of public health medicine.

[15]  Soo Young Rieh Judgement of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web , 2002 .

[16]  Susan Wiedenbeck,et al.  On-line trust: concepts, evolving themes, a model , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[17]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility , 2007 .

[18]  Jan Alexander,et al.  Teaching critical evaluation skills for World Wide Web resources , 1996 .

[19]  Michael D Slater,et al.  Descriptions of Web sites in search listings: a potential obstacle to informed choice of health information. , 2003, American journal of public health.

[20]  G. Eysenbach Credibility of Health Information and Digital Media: New Perspectives and Implications for Youth , 2007 .

[21]  Hakon Hakonarson,et al.  THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA. , 1955, British medical journal.

[22]  Julia Fox-Rushby,et al.  Vaccine-preventable Diseases , 2006 .

[23]  Soo Young Rieh,et al.  College Students' Credibility Judgments in the Information-Seeking Process , 2008 .

[24]  R. M. Wolfe,et al.  Content and design attributes of antivaccination web sites. , 2002, JAMA.

[25]  David Lankes,et al.  Challenges to Teaching Credibility Assessment in Contemporary Schooling , 2007 .

[26]  Lee Rainie,et al.  The online health care revolution: how the web helps americans take better care of themselves , 2000 .

[27]  Soo Young Rieh Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[28]  Pierre Pluye,et al.  Shortcomings of health information on the Internet. , 2003, Health promotion international.

[29]  D. Jamison,et al.  Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries , 1993 .