DOI 10.1080/17538068.2024.2379160
Online content on eating disorders: a natural language processing study.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Online content can inform the personal risk of developing an eating disorder, and it can influence the time and motivation to seek treatment. Patients routinely seek information online, and access to information is crucial for both prevention and treatment. The primary aim of the current study was to quantify the readability scores of online content on eating disorders using natural language processing algorithms, across two languages: English and Italian.
METHODS
Unique terms related to single diagnoses were searched using Google®. The content available on Wikipedia was also assessed. Readability was defined according to the Flesch Readability Ease (FRE) and the Rate Readability Index (RIX). The scientific support of retrieved content and the authoritativeness of sources were measured through standardized variables.
RESULTS
In Italian, online content was more likely published by private psychotherapy institutes or by websites that promote diet-advice or weight-loss. In both languages, the most readable content was on Anorexia Nervosa (RIX 4.18, FRE-en 59.6, FRE-it 41.69), Bulimia Nervosa (RIX 3.99, FRE-en 66.27, FRE-it 39.66) or Binge Eating (RIX 4.01, FRE-en 68.10, FRE-it 38.62). English sources consistently had more references than Italian pages (range 35-182, vs 1-163, respectively). and had a higher percentage of citations available in the target language. The content of these references was mainly reflective of peer-reviewed or clinical manuals.
CONCLUSION
Attention should be given to developing online content for Muscle Dysmorphia and Orthorexia Nervosa, as well as improving the overall readability of online content on eating disorders, especially for languages other than English.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.