<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>6</volume><submitter>Smekal M</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Although numerous websites for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are available, little is known about their content and quality.&lt;h4>Objective&lt;/h4>To evaluate the quality of CKD websites, and the degree to which they align with information needs identified by patients with CKD.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We identified websites by entering "chronic kidney disease" in 3 search engines: Google.com (with regional variants for Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States), Bing.com, and Yahoo.com. We included the first 50 unique English-language sites from each search. We evaluated website content using a 30-point scale comprising 8 priority content domains identified by patients with CKD (&lt;i>understanding CKD, diet, symptoms, medications, mental/physical health, finances, travel&lt;/i>, and &lt;i>work/school&lt;/i>). We used standardized tools to evaluate usability, reliability, and readability (DISCERN, HONcode, LIDA, Reading Ease, and Reading Grade Level). Two reviewers independently conducted the search, screen, and evaluation.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Of the 2093 websites identified, 115 were included. Overall, sites covered a mean (SD) of 29% (17.8) of the CKD content areas. The proportion of sites covering content related to &lt;i>understanding CKD, symptoms&lt;/i>, and &lt;i>diet&lt;/i> was highest (97%, 80%, and 72%, respectively). The proportion of sites covering &lt;i>travel, finances&lt;/i>, and &lt;i>work/school&lt;/i> content was lowest (22%, 12%, and 12%, respectively). The mean (SD) scores for DISCERN, LIDA and HONcode were 68% (14.6), 71% (14.4), and 75% (17.2), respectively, considered above average for usability and reliability. The mean (SD) Reading Grade Level was 10.6 (2.8) and Reading Ease was 49.8 (14.4), suggesting poor readability.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Although many CKD web sites were of reasonable quality, their readability was poor. Furthermore, most sites covered less than 30% of the content patients identified as important for CKD self-management. These results will inform content gaps in internet-accessible information on CKD self-management that should be addressed by future eHealth web-based tools.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Canadian journal of kidney health and disease</journal><pagination>2054358119863091</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC6668187</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Content and Quality of Websites for Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: An Environmental Scan.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC6668187</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Donald M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Grill A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hemmelgarn BR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Beanlands H</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gil S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sparkes D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Large C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Elliott M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Harwood L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Brimble S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Smekal M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Straus S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Tu K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Samuel S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Waldvogel B</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Novak M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Tong A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>James M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Delgado M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Herrington G</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Content and Quality of Websites for Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: An Environmental Scan.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Although numerous websites for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are available, little is known about their content and quality.&lt;h4>Objective&lt;/h4>To evaluate the quality of CKD websites, and the degree to which they align with information needs identified by patients with CKD.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We identified websites by entering "chronic kidney disease" in 3 search engines: Google.com (with regional variants for Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States), Bing.com, and Yahoo.com. We included the first 50 unique English-language sites from each search. We evaluated website content using a 30-point scale comprising 8 priority content domains identified by patients with CKD (&lt;i>understanding CKD, diet, symptoms, medications, mental/physical health, finances, travel&lt;/i>, and &lt;i>work/school&lt;/i>). We used standardized tools to evaluate usability, reliability, and readability (DISCERN, HONcode, LIDA, Reading Ease, and Reading Grade Level). Two reviewers independently conducted the search, screen, and evaluation.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Of the 2093 websites identified, 115 were included. Overall, sites covered a mean (SD) of 29% (17.8) of the CKD content areas. The proportion of sites covering content related to &lt;i>understanding CKD, symptoms&lt;/i>, and &lt;i>diet&lt;/i> was highest (97%, 80%, and 72%, respectively). The proportion of sites covering &lt;i>travel, finances&lt;/i>, and &lt;i>work/school&lt;/i> content was lowest (22%, 12%, and 12%, respectively). The mean (SD) scores for DISCERN, LIDA and HONcode were 68% (14.6), 71% (14.4), and 75% (17.2), respectively, considered above average for usability and reliability. The mean (SD) Reading Grade Level was 10.6 (2.8) and Reading Ease was 49.8 (14.4), suggesting poor readability.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Although many CKD web sites were of reasonable quality, their readability was poor. Furthermore, most sites covered less than 30% of the content patients identified as important for CKD self-management. These results will inform content gaps in internet-accessible information on CKD self-management that should be addressed by future eHealth web-based tools.</description><dates><release>2019-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2019</publication><modification>2024-02-15T02:37:14.579Z</modification><creation>2019-08-12T07:04:54Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC6668187</accession><cross_references><pubmed>31391944</pubmed><doi>10.1177/2054358119863091</doi></cross_references></HashMap>