Introduction: People of reproductive age (20-45 years) turn to the Internet for health information more often than do adults older than the age of 45. We sought to assess the readability and quality of male infertility websites.
Methods: After querying Google for "male infertility," 4 reviewers classified and analyzed the top 60 results. Website information quality was evaluated using the Health on the Net code (HONcode) accreditation status, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, and DISCERN score. We assessed readability using Flesch Reading Ease and Dale-Chall indexes.
Results: The DISCERN score average was 44±12 (out of a maximum of 80). A total of 60% (36/60) of websites scored a 1, 2 or 3 ("poor quality"). JAMA criteria were met by 4/60 (6.7%) websites. The mean Dale-Chall score was 9.53±1.30 and the mean Flesch Reading Ease index was 34.01±16.26. Of the websites 20% (12/60) were HONcode certified.
Conclusions: Only 6.7% of male infertility websites satisfied JAMA benchmark criteria. Treatment information was nominal, with only 5% describing risks and 25% discussing benefits. Less than 30% of websites encouraged shared decision making despite requiring a college to graduate degree reading level. However, 72% provided unbiased information, and a majority of websites were hospital based. Providers should caution patients that potentially unreadable and incomplete information on male infertility is prevalent online.
Keywords: consumer health information; infertility; internet; male; urology.