Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026
Systematic review of the quality, readability, and reliability of web-based pediatric neurosurgical patient education information.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Ogbonnah Chinenye O, Allbright Malena L, Rizk Elias B
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Parents, caregivers, and pediatric patients increasingly rely on the internet to understand complex diagnoses and treatment options. However, much of this content is unregulated with poorly defined quality, accuracy, and readability standards. The objective of this study is to summarize existing literature evaluating the quality of online pediatric neurosurgical information and to identify opportunities to improve digital content.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science to identify studies evaluating the quality and readability of online content related to neurosurgical conditions and procedures. Articles were excluded if they lacked original data, did not use validated quality assessment tools, or did not focus on neurosurgical content.
RESULTS: A total of 42 studies evaluating 1,456 websites and 1,960 videos were included, representing more than 251 million cumulative views. Of these, 6 studies focused on pediatric populations. Among pediatric-specific studies, the mean DISCERN score was 36.6 ± 13.2 (16-80 scale), the JAMA Benchmark score was 2.68 ± 0.83 (0-4 scale), and the Global Quality Score was 3.05 ± 0.67 (1-5 scale), indicating low to moderate quality overall. Pediatric-focused content demonstrated marginally higher quality scores compared to adult-only studies, though both groups fell below accepted standards. Readability analyses demonstrated that most resources exceeded recommended reading levels for patients and caregivers.
CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates substantial variability and overall moderate to poor quality in online pediatric neurosurgery content related. Dedicated studies evaluating pediatric-specific resources remain limited, and existing content frequently fails to meet the readability and quality standards appropriate for caregivers and families.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science to identify studies evaluating the quality and readability of online content related to neurosurgical conditions and procedures. Articles were excluded if they lacked original data, did not use validated quality assessment tools, or did not focus on neurosurgical content.
RESULTS: A total of 42 studies evaluating 1,456 websites and 1,960 videos were included, representing more than 251 million cumulative views. Of these, 6 studies focused on pediatric populations. Among pediatric-specific studies, the mean DISCERN score was 36.6 ± 13.2 (16-80 scale), the JAMA Benchmark score was 2.68 ± 0.83 (0-4 scale), and the Global Quality Score was 3.05 ± 0.67 (1-5 scale), indicating low to moderate quality overall. Pediatric-focused content demonstrated marginally higher quality scores compared to adult-only studies, though both groups fell below accepted standards. Readability analyses demonstrated that most resources exceeded recommended reading levels for patients and caregivers.
CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates substantial variability and overall moderate to poor quality in online pediatric neurosurgery content related. Dedicated studies evaluating pediatric-specific resources remain limited, and existing content frequently fails to meet the readability and quality standards appropriate for caregivers and families.