This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Correction  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor.—While the amount of medical information on the Internet is rapidly growing, most of this new information seems to be of either low or indeterminable quality. Ratings that separate good and bad Web sites should facilitate access to medical information on the Internet. In response to the excellent study by Dr Jadad and Ms Gagliardi¹ about the rating instruments available for rating health information on the Internet, we propose criteria to be included in such rating instruments.

Current rating instruments are excessively weighted by factors unrelated to quality of information. Many of the instruments reviewed by Jadad and Gagliardi allow a Web site to receive a high rating based solely on appearance and ease of use. We agree that Web sites should be well designed and easy to use and that rating systems should assess these features. However, the validity and accuracy of health information on a . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Rating Health Information on the Internet: Navigating to Knowledge or to Babel?
Alejandro R. Jadad and Anna Gagliardi
JAMA. 1998;279(8):611-614.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

State-of-the-Art Review: Warfarin Therapy: A Review of the Literature Since the Fifth American College of Chest Physicians' Consensus Conference on Antithrombotic Therapy
Lodwick
CLIN APPL THROMB HEMOST 1999;5:208-215.