Drug Safety

, Volume 26, Issue 7, pp 519–527 | Cite as

Important Drug Safety Information on the Internet

Assessing its Accuracy and Reliability
  • Athina Tatsioni
  • Evagelia Gerasi
  • Eumorfili Charitidou
  • Nafsika Simon
  • Venetsanos Mavreas
  • John P. A. Ioannidis
Original Research Article

Abstract

Background: The Internet is becoming increasingly important as a source of health-related information, but the accuracy and reliability of information presented on the world wide web is debated.

Objective: We aimed to assess whether important, recent drug safety information is accurately reflected on Internet sites.

Methods: We evaluated whether major warnings issued by the US FDA between October 1, 2000 and September 30, 2001 on severe and life-threatening drug toxicity were mentioned 4–16 months later in the top ten web pages identified for these drugs by each of seven different search engines. We examined predictors of precise mention of the FDA warnings using logistic regressions.

Results: Twenty major safety warnings on 21 drugs (including three withdrawals) were eligible for the study. Among 519 different pertinent web pages retrieved (16–32 for each drug), precise mention of the safety issue was made in only 165 (31.8%). Best rates of precise mention were seen in web sites sponsored by attorneys (79.4%), in physician-oriented web pages (65.5%) and for withdrawn drugs (57.9%). In addition to these factors, better coverage of the FDA warnings was independently seen when no other adverse effects from the same organ system was mentioned (p < 0.001), while coverage was worse when there was no date on the site and web page (p = 0.020), and when the site owner could not be classified or was unknown (p = 0.014).

Conclusions: Important safety warnings are inadequately covered in the majority of web pages. This deficiency creates a source of potentially harmful misinformation for health consumers.

Keywords

Viramune Safety Information Alosetron Rapacuronium Safety Warning 

Notes

Acknowledgements

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this manuscript. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the contents of this manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Jadad AR, Gagliardi A. Rating health information on the internet: navigating to knowledge or to Babel? JAMA 1998; 279: 611–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shepperd S, Charnock D, Gann B. Helping patients access high quality health information. BMJ 1999; 319: 764–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wyatt JC. Commentary: measuring quality and impact of the World Wide Web. BMJ 1997; 314: 1879–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Impicciatore P, Pandolfini C, Casella N, et al. Reliability of health information for the public on the world wide web: systematic survey of advice on managing fever in children at home. BMJ 1997; 314: 1875–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Metz JM, Devine P, DeNittis A, et al. Utilization of the internet by oncology patients to obtain cancer related information [abstract 1575]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2001; 20: 395aGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yaken S, Shi W, Thaler H, et al. Use of internet and other information resources among adult cancer patients and their companions [abstract 1589]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2001; 20: 398aGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    O’Connor JB, Johanson JF. Use of the web for medical information by a gastroenterology clinic population. JAMA 2000; 284: 1962–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Health on the Net. Survey on the evolution of internet use for health purposes: raw data for survey February-March 2001 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.honch/Survey/FebMar2001 [Accessed 2002 Apr 16]
  9. 9.
    Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, et al. Health information on the internet: accessibility, quality and reliability in English and Spanish. JAMA 2001; 285: 2612–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eysenbach G. Consumer health informatics. BMJ 2000; 320: 1713–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, et al. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA 2002; 287: 2691–700PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meric F, Bernstam EV, Mirza NQ, et al. Breast cancer on the world wide web: cross sectional survey of quality of information and popularity of websites. BMJ 2002; 324: 577–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kunst H, Groot D, Latthe PM, et al. Accuracy of information on apparently credible websites: survey of five common health topics. BMJ 2002; 324: 581–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wilson P. How to find the good and avoid the bad or ugly: a short guide to tools for rating quality of health information on the internet. BMJ 2002; 324: 598–602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Eysenbach G, Kohler C. How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ 2002; 324: 573–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ioannidis JP, Lau J. Completeness of safety reporting in randomized trials: an evaluation of 7 medical areas. JAMA 2001; 285: 437–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ioannidis JP, Contopoulos-Ioannidis DG. Reporting of safety data from randomised trials. Lancet 1998; 352: 1752–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lasser KE, Allen PD, Woolhandler SJ, et al. Timing of new black box warnings and withdrawals for prescription medications. JAMA 2002; 287: 2215–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ioannidis JP, Chew P, Lau J. Standardized retrieval of adverse effects data for meta-analysis of safety outcomes: a feasibility study in acute sinusitis. J Clin Epidemiol 2002; 55: 619–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rigby M, Forsstrom J, Roberts R, et al. Verifying quality and safety in health informatics services. BMJ 2001; 323: 552–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Darmoni SJ, Haugh MC, Lukas B, et al. Level of evidence should be gold standard [letter]. BMJ 2001; 322: 1367PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Athina Tatsioni
    • 1
  • Evagelia Gerasi
    • 1
  • Eumorfili Charitidou
    • 1
  • Nafsika Simon
    • 1
  • Venetsanos Mavreas
    • 2
  • John P. A. Ioannidis
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Clinical Trials and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Department of Hygiene and EpidemiologyUniversity of Ioannina School of MedicineIoanninaGreece
  2. 2.Department of PsychiatryUniversity of Ioannina School of MedicineIoanninaGreece
  3. 3.Division of Clinical Care Research, Department of MedicineTufts-New England Medical CenterBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations