Exercise 9: Evaluate sources of information

There are a number of criteria which can help determine if information is "good" information. These are the basics:
Authority
Objectivity
Accuracy
Coverage
Relevance
Time Aspects
Usability
Sources

For the purposes of determining whether health information on the WWW can be trusted, some of these criteria are more important than others. Some are easier to get information about than others as well.
Authority
Probably the single most important criterion is authority. If you don't know who is writing the information, you can't really trust it.
Who wrote the information?
Is the author a physician, nurse practitioner, or other health professional?
What are their credentials, affiliations, and professional experience?
What are their qualifications for writing on the topic?
Are they acknowledged experts in the field you're reading about?
Someone can be a respected expert in, for example, pediatrics. That doesn't qualify them as an expert in women's health. Health and medical knowledge is so specialized now, it's impossible to be an all-around expert.
Can you be relatively certain the author is who s/he claims to be? There should be a way to contact the author for questions or comments.
E-mail address
"Snail-mail" address or telephone number
Where is the Web page located?
Look at the URL (uniform resource locator - address).
Is the page part of the Website of an organization whose name you can trust?
university (.edu)
government (.gov)
institutional (.org)
commercial (.com)
Does the address show that it's a personal home page?
A personal home page is one published by an individual who or may not be affiliated with a larger institution.
Personal home pages can be put up by anyone - they need to be carefully scrutinized before the information can be accepted as trustworthy.
It's not always easy to tell if you're reading a personal home page or not. Some are very professional looking.
The URL address of the page may have a variety of endings (e.g., .com, .edu, etc.), but a tilde (~) is frequently somewhere in the URL.
If you feel you can trust the sponsoring organization, you can probably trust the Web documents within their site. However, regardless of the source, you need to evaluate any information critically before you put it into practice. Discuss information retrieved from any source with your health care provider - he or she will be glad to help you with interpretation of what you've found. Your nurse practitioner or physician has the experience and know-how to steer you in the right direction. Remember - your health, and your family's health, are at stake here!
Objectivity
Objectivity, or perhaps more important, the lack of objectivity, is fairly easy to detect if you know what you're looking for. Objectivity means all sides of issues are portrayed in a fair light. There is no propaganda or misinformation. The information is free from obvious errors or misleading omissions. However, this may not be easy to detect, if you don't know the subject matter well already.
To see if information is presented objectively, look for the following:
Purpose of the page
Is it to sell a product of some kind?
Generally speaking, if there is an area for ordering a product on the page, the page probably contains bias!
Is it to persuade you of the correctness of a certain opinion on a controversial issue?
Are all sides of the issue presented fairly?
Is it to present current information, as a public service?
Again, look at whose site it is.
What kind of organization is responsible for the information?
If the organization has a commercial, ideological, political or other vested interest in the topic, bias may be present.
One of the major hindrances to objectivity is conflict of interest.
What type of language is used? What tone does the page have?
Emotional or persuasive language may show a lack of objectivity.
What about advertising? Is there any on the Web page?
If it is present, it should be clearly separated from informational text, so you know when one ends and the other begins. (By the way, I've written a book on this topic . . . click here to order.)
Accuracy
Accuracy is important in judging information sources. Accuracy means the information presented is correct and exact. The accuracy of a source is more difficult to evaluate than authority and objectivity - if you don't already have a good understanding of the topic, it's hard to tell if the information presented is accurate. However, there are ways to get an idea if information is accurate or not. Look for the following:
explanation of the methods used to obtain the information
listing of reference sources used
evidence that content was reviewed by other authorities for accuracy
information on how studies were conducted and analyzed
lack of obvious errors or omissions
lack of spelling, grammatical, and typographical errors
if care was not taken to detect these problems, content errors may have been missed also
Accuracy can also be assessed by comparing the information with other sources. Does it go along with, or contradict, information you've seen in other sources (information provided by your health care provider, newspaper and magazine articles, etc.)?
Is the information "too good to be true?" Then it probably isn't true!

Coverage
Coverage means the completeness of the information presented. It is also difficult to determine without a thorough understanding of the topic. The coverage of the topic is greatly influenced by the audience for whom the information was written. For example, information intended for use by health care professionals would probably have greater coverage than information intended for use by health care consumers.
Coverage includes:
The depth and breadth of the information (comprehensiveness)
Breadth - coverage of all aspects of the subject
Depth - level of detail presented
Ways to assess coverage:
Look for obvious gaps or omissions in the coverage of the topic. Does the information presented leave you with unanswered questions?
Compare the information presented with print resources on the same topic. Is the information presented equivalent in breadth and depth?
Relevance
Relevance is defined as "relation to the matter at hand: practical and especially social applicability: pertinence." This criterion is particularly important in the evaluation of health-related information. Is the information suited to your needs? Is it pertinent?
It can be related to:
The purpose of the Web page
The purpose you have in looking for the information
The utility or usability of the information
Why are you looking for the information?
Is the content related to your needs?
Is the information current and the coverage broad enough to meet your needs?
Again, run any information you've found by your health care provider to see if it's applicable to your situation. It's difficult to be objective about the issues when confronted with illness in yourself or a loved one. Your physician or NP can help you sort things out.Time Aspects
The time aspects of a document are particularly important in fields which change rapidly, for example, science and medicine. It's important to get up-to-date health information. Even a few months can be crucial in a field in which drugs and treatments are evolving so rapidly. Time aspects of the document are shown below:
When was the document:
Created?
Placed on the Web?
Copyrighted?
Last revised or updated?
Look in the footer (the bottom of the document) for dates. This is the most common place for them.
What edition of the work is presented?
When was the information in the document gathered?
Usability
How easy to use is the Web site you're evaluating? Is it "user-friendly?"
Navigating around the site should be easy.
clear site map or table of contents
menus
The site should be logically arranged, with the use of good graphic design.
Multimedia should be used appropriately. It should add to, rather than distract from, the content.
Information should be concise, to reduce lengthy scrolling through the document.
Hyperlinks should be intact and operable.
Consideration must be taken of the varying levels of technology which may be used to access the site.
The site should be accessible to most users; text-only, non-frames views should be available.
When possible, enhancements should be added to aid those with access problems (e.g., text versions of image and sound files for individuals with visual or hearing problems).
Sources
Here are some sites to explore which support the information provided above. Many were used to develop this Web page. They are listed in APA format. Author and year of publication are listed first, followed by title of the source, and URL of the source. The date I first accessed the site is in brackets. Check out:
Alexander, J., & Tate, M. (1997). Checklist for an informational Web page [Online]. Available: http://www.science.widener.edu/~withers/inform.htm [1998, February 21]. Moved to: http://www2.widener.edu/Wolfgram-Memorial-Library/webevaluation/inform.htm [2000, November 25].
Checklist of questions to ask to evaluate the quality of informational Web pages.
Alexander, J., & Tate, M. (1996). Evaluating Web pages: Links to examples of various concepts [Online]. Available: http://www.science.widener.edu/~withers/examples.htm [1998, April 28]. Moved to: http://www2.widener.edu/Wolfgram-Memorial-Library/webevaluation/examples.htm [2000, November 25].