Evaluation of the Accuracy, Credibility, and Readability of Statin-Related Websites: Cross-Sectional Study

Eunice Ling; Domenico de Pieri; Evenne Loh; Karen M Scott; Stephen C H Li; Heather J Medbury

doi:10.2196/42849

Evaluation of the Accuracy, Credibility, and Readability of Statin-Related Websites: Cross-Sectional Study

Interact J Med Res. 2024 Mar 14:13:e42849. doi: 10.2196/42849.

Authors

Eunice Ling¹, Domenico de Pieri^#¹, Evenne Loh^#¹, Karen M Scott¹, Stephen C H Li², Heather J Medbury^{1

3}

Affiliations

¹ Sydney Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
² Institute of Clinical Pathology and Medical Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Australia.
³ Vascular Biology Research Centre, Surgery, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Australia.

^# Contributed equally.

PMID: 38483461
PMCID: PMC10979333
DOI: 10.2196/42849

Abstract

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) represents the greatest burden of mortality worldwide, and statins are the most commonly prescribed drug in its management. A wealth of information pertaining to statins and their side effects is on the internet; however, to date, no assessment of the accuracy, credibility, and readability of this information has been undertaken.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the quality (accuracy, credibility, and readability) of websites likely to be visited by the general public undertaking a Google search of the side effects and use of statin medications.

Methods: Following a Google web search, we reviewed the top 20 consumer-focused websites with statin information. Website accuracy, credibility, and readability were assessed based on website category (commercial, not-for-profit, and media), website rank, and the presence or absence of the Health on the Net Code of Conduct (HONcode) seal. Accuracy and credibility were assessed following the development of checklists (with 20 and 13 items, respectively). Readability was assessed using the Simple Measure of Gobbledegook scores.

Results: Overall, the accuracy score was low (mean 14.35 out of 20). While side effects were comprehensively covered by 18 websites, there was little information about statin use in primary and secondary prevention. None of the websites met all criteria on the credibility checklist (mean 7.8 out of 13). The median Simple Measure of Gobbledegook score was 9.65 (IQR 8.825-10.85), with none of the websites meeting the recommended reading grade of 6, even the media websites. A website bearing the HONcode seal did not mean that the website was more comprehensive or readable.

Conclusions: The quality of statin-related websites tended to be poor. Although the information contained was accurate, it was not comprehensive and was presented at a reading level that was too difficult for an average reader to fully comprehend. As such, consumers risk being uninformed about this pharmacotherapy.

Keywords: accuracy; cardiovascular; consumer health information; credibility; digital health, health information seeking; management; medication; mortality; pharmacotherapy; readability; risk; statins.

©Eunice Ling, Domenico de Pieri, Evenne Loh, Karen M Scott, Stephen C H Li, Heather J Medbury. Originally published in the Interactive Journal of Medical Research (https://www.i-jmr.org/), 14.03.2024.