Background: Some health websites provide a public forum for consumers to post ratings and reviews on drugs. Drug reviews are easily accessible and comprehensible, unlike clinical trials and published literature. Because the public increasingly uses the Internet as a source of medical information, it is important to know whether such information is reliable.
Objective: We aim to examine whether Web-based consumer drug ratings and reviews can be used as a resource to compare drug performance.
Methods: We analyzed 103,411 consumer-generated reviews on 615 drugs used to treat 249 disease conditions from the health website WebMD. Statistical analysis identified 427 drug pairs from 24 conditions for which two drugs treating the same condition had significantly and substantially different satisfaction ratings (with at least a half-point difference between Web-based ratings and P<.01). PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for publications that were assessed for concordance with findings online.
Results: Scientific literature was found for 77 out of the 427 drug pairs and compared to findings online. Nearly two-thirds (48/77, 62%) of the online drug trends with at least a half-point difference in online ratings were supported by published literature (P=.02). For a 1-point online rating difference, the concordance rate increased to 68% (15/22) (P=.07). The discrepancies between scientific literature and findings online were further examined to obtain more insights into the usability of Web-based consumer-generated reviews. We discovered that (1) drugs with FDA black box warnings or used off-label were rated poorly in Web-based reviews, (2) drugs with addictive properties were rated higher than their counterparts in Web-based reviews, and (3) second-line or alternative drugs were rated higher. In addition, Web-based ratings indicated drug delivery problems. If FDA black box warning labels are used to resolve disagreements between publications and online trends, the concordance rate increases to 71% (55/77) (P<.001) for a half-point rating difference and 82% (18/22) for a 1-point rating difference (P=.002). Our results suggest that Web-based reviews can be used to inform patients' drug choices, with certain caveats.
Conclusions: Web-based reviews can be viewed as an orthogonal source of information for consumers, physicians, and drug manufacturers to assess the performance of a drug. However, one should be cautious to rely solely on consumer reviews as ratings can be strongly influenced by the consumer experience.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4642403 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4396 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
An infodemiologic review of internet resources on dental hypersensitivity: A quality and readability assessment.
PLoS One
January 2025
Substitutive Dental Sciences Department (Prosthodontics), College of Dentistry, Taibah University, Al Madinah, Saudi Arabia.
Background: This study aimed to investigate the quality and readability of online English health information about dental sensitivity and how patients evaluate and utilize these web-based information.
Methods: The credibility and readability of health information was obtained from three search engines. We conducted searches in "incognito" mode to reduce the possibility of biases.
Enhancing equity in academic surgery promotion practices.
Surgery
January 2025
Section of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago, Pritzker School of Medicine, IL. Electronic address:
Background: Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) in medicine and women faculty have lower 10-year promotion rates than their White and male peers, despite controlling for productivity metrics. Promotion standards vary across institutions, but there is likely a common need to improve transparency and consistency while mitigating bias, inequity, and the harm of additional equity work that is commonly expected of Black, Indigenous, People of Color and women faculty (the so-called minority tax).
Methods: A promotion advisory committee consisting of clinical and research faculty at all ranks specified expectations for a faculty member at the associate or full professor ranks, with 10-15 examples given for each "mission" (clinical, research, and education).
NutriBase - management system for the integration and interoperability of food- and nutrition-related data and knowledge.
Front Nutr
January 2025
Computer Systems Department, Jožef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Introduction: Contemporary data and knowledge management and exploration are challenging due to regular releases, updates, and different types and formats. In the food and nutrition domain, solutions for integrating such data and knowledge with respect to the FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability) principles are still lacking.
Methods: To address this issue, we have developed a data and knowledge management system called NutriBase, which supports the compilation of a food composition database and its integration with evidence-based knowledge.
How Patients With Cancer Use the Internet to Search for Health Information: Scenario-Based Think-Aloud Study.
JMIR Infodemiology
January 2025
Amsterdam School of Communication Research/ASCoR, Department of Communication Science, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Background: Patients with cancer increasingly use the internet to seek health information. However, thus far, research treats web-based health information seeking (WHIS) behavior in a rather dichotomous manner (ie, approaching or avoiding) and fails to capture the dynamic nature and evolving motivations that patients experience when engaging in WHIS throughout their disease trajectory. Insights can be used to support effective patient-provider communication about WHIS and can lead to better designed web-based health platforms.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCleft-Related Revision Procedures: Surgeon Perspectives on Shared Decision-Making and a Decision Aid Prototype.
Cleft Palate Craniofac J
January 2025
Section of Plastic Surgery, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Objective: Decision-making for elective cleft lip and nose revisions varies widely, from patient-led decisions to more paternalistic approaches. As these procedures incur additional scarring that may impact future interventions, patients should be equipped to participate in these surgical decisions. We thus developed a decision aid based on international standards, and to ensure methodologic rigor, we sought feedback from other surgeons regarding shared decision-making and potential barriers to adopting the decision aid.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!