Cross-sectional analysis assessed the quality of online information on periodontal surgery, revealing significant variability and readability issues.
Objective To investigate the quality of online information provided by dental‐related websites regarding periodontal surgery. Methods The term “Gum Surgery” was entered into three search engines (Google, Yahoo, and Bing). The content of websites satisfying selection criteria was assessed with five validated quality of information tools (DISCERN, The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool [PEMAT], Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA] benchmarks, and HONCode and @TRUST certification). The Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) was used to evaluate the readability of content. Results A total of 55 websites satisfied selection criteria. The mean (SD) DISCERN score for all website categories was 2.89 (0.57). The quality of information related to the risks of each treatment scored poorly in most websites. The healthcare portals obtained the highest mean PEMAT score of 71.74%, a statistically significant outcome. Healthcare portal websites also recorded the highest mean (SD) JAMA score of 3.72 (0.75) out of 4. The mean (SD) SMOG score was 9.56 (1.07). Cohen's κ inter‐rater reliability for DISCERN and PEMAT scores were 0.75 and 0.79, respectively. Conclusion The information available online about periodontal surgery was variable and difficult to read, falling short of established standards for accuracy, reliability, and credibility. Vital information was often omitted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mak et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: