Evaluating The Quality And Readability Of Online Resources For Labiaplasty

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the quality, readability, and accuracy of Web-based information regarding labiaplasty and to characterize the types of Web sites providing this information. MethodsInvestigators used 3 major search engines to query the internet using the search terms labiaplasty, labia reduction, and vaginal rejuvenation. Two validated tools were used to evaluate Web sites: the JAMA benchmark tool and the DISCERN instrument. Three physicians independently reviewed each Web site. Interrater agreement was assessed, and reviewer scores were averaged. Flesch-Kincaid reading ease and Flesch-Kincaid grade level of each site were assessed. Data were analyzed using Stata 14.0 (College Station, TX). ResultsOf the 112 Web sites reviewed, 100 Web sites were from North America, 9 from Europe, 2 from Australia, and 1 from Asia. The median score using the JAMA tool was 1.0 (0.33-4.0), indicating low accountability, whereas the median score using the DISCERN tool was 28 (18.7-77) of 80 with higher scores indicating higher quality. Cohen's weighted kappa statistic (0.81) demonstrated near perfect agreement among reviewers for DISCERN scores. The median reading level was 11.9 (6.4-19.5). A majority of the Web sites (92) were for-profit businesses or blogs. ConclusionsThe internet enables patients to research sensitive topics and seek answers without worry of social stigma. Online health-related information is a widely used yet poorly studied source of medical information. The majority of Web sites reviewed lack balanced, evidence-based information. Given the wide variation in the quality of information, physicians should guide patients to reputable online resources.