Description:
ABSTRACTThe Internet has become a major source of health information for women, but information placed on the World Wide Web does not routinely undergo a peer review process before dissemination. In this study, we present an analysis of 197 infertility‐related Web sites for quality and accountability, using JAMA's minimal core standards for responsible print. Only 2% of the web sites analyzed met all four recommended standards, and 50.8% failed to report any of the four. Commercial web sites were more likely to fail to meet minimum standards (71.2%) than those with educational (46.8%) or supportive (29.8%) elements. Web sites with educational and informational components were most common (70.6%), followed by commercial sites (52.8%) and sites that offered a forum for infertility support and activism (28.9%). Internet resources available to infertile patients are at best variable. The current state of infertility‐related materials on the World Wide Web offers unprecedented opportunities to improve services to a growing number of e‐health users. Because of variations in quality of site content, women's health clinicians must assume responsibility for a new role as information monitor. This study provides assessment tools clinicians can apply and share with clients.