Quality Health Information on the Web: A Tool KitTips for Finding Accurate Health Information
on the Web
What is quality health information? Information that is current, scientifically-based and supported by peer-reviewed studies.
Ways to Find Quality Information on the Web
Consider the source
Only use sources that you recognize
Potential sources include the government, non-profit institutions, professional organizations, a health system, a commercial organization, or an individual
.gov = Government
.org = Organization
.edu = Education
.com = Company
Note that MedlinePlus is produced by the government.
Beware of site bias – identify the site’s purpose and funding
Advertisements should be clearly labeled as “Advertisement” or “From our Sponsor”
Focus on quality information
The author should be clearly identifiable with provided credentials or contact information
The information presented should be reviewed by an editorial board that includes medical experts this should be stated in the “About Us” section of the webpage
Be skeptical
Anything that sounds too good to be true probably is
It is recommended to check more than one site – get a second opinion!
Protect your privacy – site should have a clearly stated privacy policy
Notice what types of questions you answer before you can view site content – personal information may be sold or shared
Look for the evidence
Avoid opinions and testimonials
Check for medical research support
Make sure the information is current
Documents should be dated
Remember that medical information is always evolving
Watch out for broken links – they may reflect a poorly-maintained site
Remember to consult with your doctor
Patient-provider partnerships lead to the best medical decisions
MedlinePlus [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Library of Medicine (US); [updated 2005 Aug 12; cited 2005 August 11]. Available from: http://medlineplus.gov/.
American Dietetic Association. Position of the American Dietetic Association: Food and Nutrition Misinformation. Journal of the American Dietetic Association. 2006;106:601-607.