Abstract
PURPOSE: To categorise and evaluate the quality and readability of the web-based information about the treatment of the variety of forms of dental hypomineralization. METHODS: An internet search using two different search terms regarding treating dental hypomineralization was conducted using the Google search engine. The first 100 websites from each search were analysed. Data recorded included DISCERN instrument scores, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, and the Health on the Net seal (HON). Flesch Reading Ease Scores (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), the Simplified Measure of Gobbledygook Index (SMOG), and the Coleman-Liau index were calculated to assess readability. RESULTS: A search for "Treatment of hypomineralized teeth" on Google yielded 48,500 results. After excluding irrelevant websites, only 25 were evaluated based on affiliation with universities/medical centers, non-profit organizations, commercial entities, or government agencies. The majority of the content was medical facts presented as text and visuals such as images and videos. The study found that the scores for questions about the benefits and risks of treatment were low, while alternative treatments had high scores. Only one website met the HON code criteria, and a minority of websites achieved JAMA benchmarks. The readability ratings varied across different tests used in the study. CONCLUSION: Most websites had university or medical center affiliation but only partially related to the specialty. Two-thirds of websites used images. The online information was inaccurate, poor quality, and hard to read for the average person. Dental professionals should be aware of this information's quality and work to improve it.