Which Resources Are Better: Sales or Scholarly? An Assessment on the Readability, Quality, and Technical Features of Online Chemical Peel Websites

哪种资源更好:销售资源还是学术资源?对在线化学换肤网站的可读性、质量和技术特性进行评估

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chemical peels are an exceedingly popular cosmetic treatment with a wide variety of suppliers, each with its own online health resource describing the procedure. With increasing reliance on the internet for medical information, it is crucial that these resources provide reliable information for patients to make informed decisions. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine popular chemical peel resources and determine if those that offered chemical peel treatments (Sales) had lower readability, quality of information, and technical features compared with those that did not (Scholarly). METHODS: The term "chemical peel" was searched in July 2020 and the top 50 websites were retrieved for analysis. Each resource's readability, quality, and technical features were measured through 8 readability formulas, the DISCERN and Health on the Net Code (HONcode), and 2 website performance monitors. RESULTS: The 50 websites were analyzed with an average Fry readability score of 13th grade. Scholarly websites displayed higher readability than Sales (Flesch Reading Ease 54.4 > 47.4, P = 0.047 and Coleman-Liau Index 10.6 < 11.7, P = 0.04). Scholarly resources surpassed Sales both in quality (DISCERN 56.4 > 39.7, P < 0.001 and HONcode 11.8 > 9.5, P = 0.032) and technical features (WooRank 76.9 > 68.6, P = 0.0082). CONCLUSIONS: The average readability of chemical peel resources is too difficult, and their quality must be improved. Scholarly resources exhibited higher readability, quality, and technical features than Sales websites.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。