A systematic review on the quality of the information on the internet related to perineal trauma
Vishalli Ghai, Stergios Doumouchtsis, Vasilios Pergialiotis
Vishalli Ghai, Stergios Doumouchtsis, Vasilios Pergialiotis. A systematic review on the quality of the information on the internet related to perineal trauma. PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017078212
What is the quality of the information available on the internet related to perineal trauma?
Sources: search engines, google.com, yahoo.com, bing.com, ask.com, aol.com.
Publication period: all those currently available.
Websites available in English or facility to translate to English.
Keywords used in searches: perineal trauma, perineal tear, perineal laceration, obstetric trauma, third degree tear, fourth degree tear, obstetric anal sphincter injury.
Exclusion criteria of websites: advertisements of products, hospital, practitioners, blogs/personal experience, scientific articles/guidelines, password access, videos, book chapters.
Types of study to be included
Not applicable - websites used for this review.
Condition or domain being studied
Quality of health information on the internet related to perineal trauma.
Information on perineal trauma in human females.
Information on perineal trauma available on internet.
Any websites related to perineal trauma.
To assess quality of information for patients using validated instrument.
Timing and effect measures
Using validated instruments:
- Felsch reading ease score
- Credibility using a 10 point criteria
- Guidelines- RCOG guidance on perineal trauma.
Demographics of websites: country, funding of website, disease focused, patient focused, patient forum, privacy statement, approval (HON, information standard).
Data extraction (selection and coding)
Performed by two independent reviewers based on eligibility criteria.
Discrepancies will be resolved by a third senior reviewer.
Risk of bias (quality) assessment
Inter rater reliability coefficient (ICC) to assess agreement between both reviewers.
Strategy for data synthesis
Qualitative synthesis using mean and standard deviation to describe results from instruments and inter-rater coefficient to assess agreement.
Analysis of subgroups or subsets
Based on website demographics.
Contact details for further information
Organisational affiliation of the review
CHORUS: an International Collaboration for Harmonising Research Outcomes and Standards In Urogynaecology
Review team members and their organisational affiliations
Miss Vishalli Ghai. Epsom General Hospital
Professor Stergios Doumouchtsis. Epsom General Hospital
Dr Vasilios Pergialiotis.
Anticipated or actual start date
03 April 2017
Anticipated completion date
03 April 2018
Conflicts of interest
Stage of review
Subject index terms status
Subject indexing assigned by CRD
Subject index terms
Episiotomy; Female; Humans; Internet; Pregnancy
Date of registration in PROSPERO
21 November 2017
Date of publication of this version
28 September 2017
Details of any existing review of the same topic by the same authors
Stage of review at time of this submission
Stage / Started / Completed
Preliminary searches / Yes / Yes
Piloting of the study selection process / Yes / Yes
Formal screening of search results against eligibility criteria / Yes / No
Data extraction / No / No
Risk of bias (quality) assessment / No / No
Data analysis / No / No