Patients should not rely on low back pain information from Brazilian official websites: A mixed-methods review.
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
BACKGROUND: Websites from official organizations (e.g., Ministry of Health and Professional Councils) are assumed to be trustworthy sources of information. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the credibility, accuracy, and readability of low back pain (LBP) web-based content in Brazilian official websites. METHODS: Mixed-methods review. Google search was used for retrieving web-information about Brazilian trustworthy organizations. We assessed the URLs on three domains: credibility, accuracy, and readability of LBP contents. Qualitative analysis was performed using an open source platform in three stages: (1) organization into thematic units; (2) data exploration; and (3) interpretation of the data and summarization. RESULTS: We included 84 URLs. Accuracy was assessed for 58 URLs and none fully adhered to the guidelines. Credibility analysis was performed for 67 URLs. Disclosure of authorship was not mentioned in 58 (87%) of the URLs, 63 (94%) did not mention the sources of their information, none presented a declaration of conflict of interest, and 16 (24%) did not provide the date of creation. Readability was assessed for 72 URLs and was classified as "easy" to read in 65%. Six main themes emerged in the qualitative analysis: (1) Explanations and causes for LBP, (2) diagnosis, (3) recommendations about medication, (4) recommendations for coping and self-management, (5) performing exercises, and (6) recommendations for children and adolescents. CONCLUSIONS: The reading level is appropriate for patient-oriented information. However, Brazilian official websites demonstrated low credibility standards and while some of the content is partially supported by the current literature, there is also much inaccurate information about LBP.
