Search

Background: The leading cause of disability worldwide are the neurological disorders, which affect a significant part of the world population and are considered the second leading cause of death. The number of patients diagnosed with neurological diseases has been increasing for the last 30 years. The internet is accessible to anyone and many patients are using the internet instead of making medical appointments. Some websites may contain errors that can expose readers to certain risks.The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate the information about Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and multiple sclerosis found on the internet by French- speaking general users employing quality criteria such as credibility, completeness, accuracy, and the Brief DISCERN tool. In addition, the study tested whether the websites' Google Ranks and credibility scores could be useful indicator of website content quality. Material and methods: Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, a sample of 75 websites was selected, 25 websites for each disease. Compliance with credibility requirements was assessed using a set of 12 widely accepted criteria. Completeness and accuracy of the information were assessed by cross-checking the website content against diseases-specific evidence-based quality benchmarks developed in collaboration with specialists in the respective field. The assessment procedure followed a protocol described in previously published works. Credibility, completeness, and accuracy were expressed as scores ranging from 0 to 10. The brief DISCERN tool was applied to measure the quality of information about treatment choices as described by its authors. Overall and disease-specific means and standard deviations of quality scores were computed. Correlations between scores were tested using Spearman correlation test. This study is a component of a larger project, encompassing analyses exploring the quality of information on medical websites, covering various pathologies in different languages. Results: The overall means and standard deviations of the credibility, accuracy, completeness, and Brief DISCERN scores for the neurological disorder websites were 5.2 (1.5), 4.0 (2.6), 5.4 (2.1), and 15.3 (6.0), respectively. The disease-specific scores, presented in the same order, were 5.2 (1.0), 3.6 (2.8), 6.2 (1.6), and 13.5 (6.2) for Alzheimer's websites, 5.2 (1.7), 4.8 (2.5), 4.1 (1.6), and 17.0 (5.8) for Parkinson's websites, and 5.2 (1.8), 3.6 (2.5), 5.9 (2.3), and 15.5 (5.7) for multiple sclerosis websites. The results of the correlations test showed the following values: credibility vs. completeness score: rho=0.1971, p=0.901; credibility vs. accuracy score: rho=0.0775, p=0.5202; credibility vs. brief DISCERN score: rho=0.1883, p=0.1056; Google rank vs. completeness score: rho=-0.2967, p=0.0097; Google ranks vs. accuracy score: rho=0.1661, p=0.1662; Google rank vs. brief DISCERN score: rho=-0.3506, p=0.002. Conclusions: Overall, the average credibility, accuracy, completeness, and brief DISCERN scores for the neurological disorder websites in French were moderate, indicating substandard quality of available information. The statistically significant correlations between Google ranks and two quality scores suggest a trend where higher-ranked websites offer more comprehensive and accurate content. However, considering the low strength of the correlations observed, the practical significance of Google rankings as a reliable indicator of information quality becomes uncertain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]