That, at least, is the conclusion reached by Yale researchers in “Searching for Explanations: How the Internet Inflates Estimates of Internal Knowledge,” a paper published last week in American Psychological Association’s Journal of Experimental Psychology. Lead by doctoral candidate Matthew Fisher, the research team administered a series of experiments to over a thousand students in order to test the degree to which internet connectivity affects a person’s sense of their own intelligence. According to The Telegraph:
In one test, the internet group were given a website link which gave the answer to the question ‘how does a zip work’ while a control group were given a print-out of the same information.
When they two groups were quizzed later on an unrelated question – ‘why are cloudy nights warmer?’ the group who had searched online believed they were more knowledgeable even though they were not allowed to look up the correct answer.
Wearable devices targeted at healthy living are alone not enough to drive tangible changes in an individual’s health, experts say, although sales of these devices are expected to soar in the coming years.
Companies like Apple and Google sell watches and cellphones that can track health-related statistics, and others like Fitbit and Garmin make wristbands and even necklaces geared towards recording health-related statistics. This, in turn, is expected to translate into improved health behavior and hence better health outcomes.
But it is not that simple, say experts.
“The gap between recording information and changing behavior is substantial, and while these devices are increasing in popularity, little evidence suggests that they are bridging the gap,” experts wrote in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
….
Source:Health Behavior News Service, part of the Center for Advancing Health
Summary:More than 40 percent of U.S. Internet users use online search engines to seek guidance on weight loss and physical activity. A new study finds that high-quality weight loss information often appears after the first page of search engine results.
Given that obesity affects one-third of Americans, it is not surprising that more than 40 percent of U.S. Internet users use online search engines to seek guidance on weight loss and physical activity. A new study in the American Journal of Public Healthfinds that online searchers often initially encounter poor-quality weight loss information.
The study reveals that the first page of results, using a search engine like Google, is likely to display less reliable sites instead of more comprehensive, high-quality sites, and includes sponsored content that makes unrealistic weight loss promises.
..
“Federal agencies, academic institutions and medical organizations need to work a lot harder at search engine optimization to get their links on top of searches,” Modave added. “Consumers need to be more critical when reading online. Ideally, they could read original studies from which many stories are written but, of course, that’s not realistic for most people.”
Ever enter your symptoms into a search engine (as Google) to find what was the cause? And bring the results to your health care provider? Believe that search engines can correctly diagnose your symptoms?
A medical researcher not only was thinking along these lines. He also set up a system to see if search engines could diagnose symptoms accurately.
The results were published in a scientific paper.**
Here are some remarks from medical librarians at their discussion group.
They don’t address the problem with these search engines of bias: Google,
Bing, track what you’ve searched on, they aren’t ‘anonymous’ engines, thus
biasing the results. A different computer, with different previous user
will give different results with these search engines. Flawed article,
in my opinion. Too bad, it is interesting.
This article is very interesting. While it is about validating the instrument for analyzing the webpages, they found that only 14% of the website gave a correct diagnosis. Seventy percent came up with the diagnosis as part of a differential. It sort of scares me that many medical students and other healthcare students might use search engines to find differentials. One implication is that patients who bring in webpages may actually hold the appropriate differential in their internet printout. Physicians might consider that information. The article is NOT an open access journal. The abstract does not discuss the findings of accuracy since they were testing the scoring system.
My thoughts? Familydoctor.org (American Academy of Family Physicians) has great advice
Our symptom checker flowcharts allow you to easily track your symptoms and come to a possible diagnosis.
Remember, be sure to consult with you doctor if you feel you have a serious medical problem.
As a medical librarian, we counsel people to use any information they find as a resource when consulting with their health care provider. Information on the internet may be outdated, flawed, and sometimes even wrong.
Also, the health care providers views you as a whole person, not just a narrow set of symptoms. They use not only your symptoms, but other factors as health history, current and past treatments, and environmental factors to work toward a treatment plan.
** Abstract from PubMed.
Full text of article not available online for free.
Might be available for free or low cost at a local public, medical, or academic libary.
Call ahead and ask for a reference librarian.
Many medical and academic libraries offer some help to the public.
Int J Med Inform. 2014 Feb;83(2):131-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2013.11.002. Epub 2013 Nov 19.
The accuracy of Internet search engines to predict diagnoses from symptoms can be assessed with a validated scoring system.
Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School and Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Family Medicine Residency at CentraState, United States. Electronic address: bshenker@centrastate.com.
There’s been a lot in the news recently about the decision to hire Jenny McCarthy to replace Elizabeth Hasselback on “The View”. I cant say that I’m particularly sad to see Hasselback go, as I was never a fan of her conservative “values” but the hiring of Jenny McCarthy – as has been pointed out by many – amounts to a public health nightmare.
For those of you who don’t know, McCarthy is a staunch believer that vaccines caused her son to have autism. Furthermore, she is an outspoken advocate for not vaccinating children and both encourages and supports parents who choose not to do so. McCarthy is a strong supporter of UK physician Andrew Wakefield, who published a study in 1998 showing that the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine causes autism. That very study has been discredited as a fraud, and follow up studies have disproved Wakefield’s claim. Despite…
Overall, I think Google and other search engines are doing a better job of locating health information.
However, it is good to keep in mind that search engines rank items, they do not evaluate them!
So, search safely, knowing that search engines do not index 100% of what is available on the World Wide Web.
If you do decide to find health information on the Web, please evaluate content carefully!
Health Information is best used in consultation with a professional health care provider (or 2!)
A few good guides on evaluating health information may be found at
Toolkit – a number of tipsheets, primers, links and other resources to help journalists and consumers do a better job of evaluating claims about health care interventions. (HealthNewsReview.org)
Unlike information found in medical textbooks, which has been evaluated and edited by professionals, the information on the Internet is unfiltered. It is up to the user to evaluate and judge how good the information really is. When looking for health information it is particularly important to think about the information critically and examine the Web site carefully. Listed below are some questions and tips to think about when searching for good health information on the Internet.
What type of site is it? Is it a government site, educational or commercial? Look at the web address for the extension. The most common are .gov for government, .edu for educational, .com for commercial and .org for organizational.
Who is sponsoring the site? A good Web site will make sponsorship information clear. There should also be an address (besides an e-mail address) or a phone number to contact for more information.
What are the credentials of the sponsor or author of the material on site? If it is an organization or association, is it nationally recognized or is it a local group? Also, are the author’s qualifications relevant to the topic being discussed? For example, someone with a Ph.D. in psychology should not necessarily be accepted as an expert on nutrition.
What is the purpose of the site? Is it a public service or is it trying to sell something? If there is advertising on a page, something that is more and more common even with non-commercial sites, it should be clearly separated from the informational content. Also, it is easy to disguise promotional material as “patient education” on web sites. If a product or treatment is given a good review on one site, try to find other sites that also approve of it.
How current is the information? A good site will list when a page was first established and when it was last up-dated. If there are links to other sites, are they up-to-date?
How accurate is the information? This can be hard to determine if you’re not familiar with a topic but there are some things to look for. For example, is the information free of spelling errors and typos? Mistakes of these kind can indicate a lack of quality control. Are the sources of factual information listed? For instance, if a document states, “recent studies indicate…”, are the sources for the study listed so they can be verified? If a topic is controversial, is the information presented in a balanced way? There are many controversies in regard to treatment options; however, a good site will present the pros and cons of a particular option. Be cautious with sites that claim “miracle cures” or make conspiracy claims.
Evaluate each site separately. Links can often lead from a good site to ones of lesser quality.
Look for awards or certificates that a site has received. For example, the HON Code logo is displayed by sites that have agreed to abide by eight principals set by the Health on the Net Foundation. These principles set standards for accuracy, bias, sponsorship and confidentiality. When using a directory or search engine that rates sites, read the page that discusses what criteria are used to determine a site’s rating.
The Internet is a wonderful source of information and, when used carefully, can be very helpful in answering health-related questions. But the information found on the Internet should never be used as a substitute for consulting with a health professional. And, whenever using the Internet, keep in mind the caveat, “It is so easy to post information on the Internet that almost any idiot can do it, and almost every idiot has.”
Healthfinder.gov is a US government Web site with information and tools that can help you stay healthy. Resources on a wide range of health topics carefully selected from over 1,600 government and non-profit organizations. Social media options to connect you with people and organizations that can help you on your journey to living a healthier life.
KidsHealth provides information about health, behavior, and development from before birth through the teen years. Material is written by doctors in understandable language at three levels: parents, kids, and teens
KidsHealth also provides families with perspective, advice, and comfort about a wide range of physical, emotional, and behavioral issues that affect children and teens.
Blog posting by Dr. Bertalan Meskó in Science Roll: A doctor’s journey in genetics PhD and medicine through Web 2.0
Excerpts:
I’ve been playing around Google+ for the last couple of days and I have to admit it I really love it. Why? I’ve been using Facebook as a source of professional information but I have to add those people I like to follow as friends even if in most cases we are not friends. A few reasons why I useGoogle+ now for this purpose.
In Google+, we can easily create circles and start following people who we are not friends with.
It’s easy to determine who can see the information I share (everyone, only circles, only people in my contact list)
Excerpts from the Krafty Librarian blog item – More on G+
I am on Google+ and I am not sure if I like it. I am sporadically kicking the tires, testing it out.
Here are some reasons I like it:
I like having everything Google together. Iam not sure if I like how it brings up another window when I click the links to my email, calendar, docs, etc. on the Google bar, but I am not sure what work better.
I like the idea of Hangout, but I can only use it at home because it requires me to install a Google plugin and I don’t have a microphone or camera on my work computer. I can see it being used for web conferencing and other professional things. I tried Hangout one weekend but nobody in my Circles were hanging out so I really couldn’t test it. I think I would Hangout more if I could do it on my phone. I would also like to know if I could Hangout with people outside of my circle. For example, I would like to attend topical Hangouts but I may not want to add those people to my circles.
Setting up your circles is much more intuitive and easier than setting up friend lists in Facebook. It is really easy to do, you can click multiple people, drag and drop and easily create new circles. The Facebook friends lists were always something sort of hidden.
Posts, it automatically and easily asks you who (which circles) you want your wall posts to be seen by. In Facebook you have to play around with the post defaults and friend lists and remember to hit the arrow to change things when you don’t want a wall post to be seen by your default group.
Some of the things I don’t like:
Not enough people. Yeah all of my geek friends are on it, but nobody else. One family member is on it but he is always playing with cutting edge stuff. So in order to share things online with family and friends, I still have to go onto Facebook since the majority of my non-geek friends are not on G+. I don’t like going to different places to share information (one reason I am rarely on LinkedIn), so I don’t see myself using it until/unless more of my regular friends join.
+1 button is confusing, until you know it is just Google’s version of Like. After that it is just as boring as the Like button. I would have liked it if you could hit the +1 button and then comment on the item or person’s comment……..
There’s been much discussion around the pharmaceutical industry’s use of social media, especially Facebook. Is it worth the risk for pharma to engage in this uncontrolled space? Will consumers really “like” a medication in a place where they’re more likely to play Farmville? And what options does pharma have considering Facebook’s recently-announced policy changes?…
[The post goes on to say there are at least 150 pharmaceutical related Facebook pages , including those by corporations, brands (those dedicated to a single presription drug), unbranded pages (usually centered around a condition as diabetes), and those including games and/or applications.]
[The article goes on to discuss the legalities and Facebook policies concerning comments at pharma Facebook pages.]
[Some excerpts]
…
Facebook changes the game for pharma
“Starting today, Facebook will no longer allow admins of new pharma pages to disable commenting on the content their page shares with people on Facebook,” Facebook told pharmas in a May 17 email posted by Intouch Solutionson its blog. “Pages that currently have commenting disabled will no longer have this entitlement after August 15th. Subject to Facebook’s approval, branded pages solely dedicated to a prescription drug may (continue to) have commenting functionality removed.”
There have been some articles and blog entries lately focusing on whether Google+ could be used in medicine or pharma. I’ve been trying to use it more actively in the past couple of days and it’s still a question for me to figure out whether I should separate my professional Facebook and Google+ activities. A few comments from fellow bloggers:
“Google launched a beta version of its own social network just a couple of days ago,Google+. While many news reports over the past day or so suggest that Google+ offers some great features, most also suggest that the network is probably no reason for people to abandon their FaceBook page as an alternative.
However, could Google+ offer a FaceBook alternative for pharma companies? “…..
Today, we’re opening the Public Data Explorer to your data. We’re making a new data format, the Dataset Publishing Language (DSPL), openly available, and providing an interface foranyone to upload their datasets. DSPL is an XML-based format designed from the ground up to support rich, interactive visualizations like those in the Public Data Explorer. The DSPL language and upload interface are available in Google Labs.
To upload a dataset, click on the “My Datasets” link on the left-hand side of the Public Data Explorer. Once imported, a dataset can be visualized, embedded in external websites, shared with others and published. If you’re an official provider, you can request that your datasets appear in the Public Data Explorer directory; please contact us to discuss this process.
With this new capability, we hope more datasets can come to life through Public Data Explorer visualisations and enable people to better understand the world around them and make more informed, data-driven decisions. Stay tuned for more datasets, visualization features and DSPL extensions in the future.
Chan EH, et al. (2010) Global capacity for emerging infectious disease detection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Catalogue of selected WHO-confirmed outbreaks (as reported in “Disease Outbreak News”), 1996-2009. This tool is meant to provide a visualization of the dataset used in this publication from the HealthMap Project (Children’s Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, http://www.healthmap.org)
Sexually Transmitted Disease Morbidity Data from U.S. National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention (NCHHSTP), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This dataset was prepared by Google based on data downloaded from CDC WONDER.
Counts and rates of death by underlying cause of death, age, race, sex, and year. Data from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) National Vital Statistics System at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), powered by CDC WONDER. This dataset was prepared by Google based on data downloaded from CDC WONDER.
Cancer cases by U.S. state, age group, gender and cancer site. Cancer statistics are produced by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), in collaboration with the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR). This dataset was prepared by Google based on data downloaded from CDC WONDER.
This blog presents a sampling of health and medical news and resources for all. Selected articles and resources will hopefully be of general interest but will also encourage further reading through posted references and other links. Currently I am focusing on public health, basic and applied research and very broadly on disease and healthy lifestyle topics.
Several times a month I will post items on international and global health issues. My Peace Corps Liberia experience (1980-81) has formed me as a global citizen in many ways and has challenged me to think of health and other topics in a more holistic manner.
Do you have an informational question in the health/medical area? Email me at jmflahiff@yahoo.com I will reply within 48 hours.
My professional work experience and education includes over 15 years experience as a medical librarian and a Master’s in Library Science. In my most recent position I enjoyed contributing to our library’s blog, performing in depth literature searches, and collaborating with faculty, staff, students, and the general public.
While I will never be be able to keep up with the universe of current health/medical news, I subscribe to the following to glean entries for this blog.
Health and Medical News and Resources 