The study observed how people search for health information online through focus groups and interviews. It found that people's search strategies were vague and ineffective, but they were still successful in finding answers. People's criteria for trusting websites included professional appearance, authority of the source, readability, credentials of the owner, and frequent updates. However, people did not thoroughly research the owners or information compilation methods of websites.

1. THE QUEST TO FIND QUALITY HEALTH
AND MEDICAL INFORMATION ON THE
WEB

2. INTRODUCTION
 Prior to this study, the average person’s criteria for assessing
how likely a website would provide them with quality information
was not a topic frequently discussed among human information
behavior specialists.
 Average information seekers employ a variety of ways for
researching health and medical information on the Internet.
However, based on the results of this study, their methods for
doing so are less than thorough and somewhat capricious.
 In the article, “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,” Gunther
Eysenbach and Christian Köhler demonstrate that most people
search for and locate information on the internet in a way that is
different from what most researchers have assumed.

3. WHAT THE STUDY DID
 The main goal of the observational study was to
establish how ordinary people searched for health and
medical information on the Internet, how successful they
were, and what markers for quality they used
 Data was acquired using focus groups, naturalistic
observations of people searching the internet, and post-
search in-depth interviews
 8 or 9 health related questions were given to
participants of the study with instructions that they were
to search for the answers on the Internet. Their
methods were studied in a laboratory setting.

4. RESULTS OF THE STUDY

5. RESULTS OF THE STUDY
Based on the feedback offered by the participants of the
focus groups, several factors affect consumer criteria for
researching information on the internet:
 Authority of source
 Layout and appearance
 Advertising
 Readability
 Outbound Links
 Picture of the site owner
 Email
 Credentials and qualifications
 Updating of content
 Quality seal and third party endorsements

6. PEOPLE’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING
INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET
Authority of Source
 People want to know where info is coming from and who
is responsible for the content
 Information must be considered reliable, or from
respected scientific and public institutions
 People trust the websites of an organization or
association more than private websites
 It must be made clear whether the information reported
is from a single person or broader source, on scientific
criteria or personal experience

7. PEOPLE’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING
INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET
Layout and Design
 People consider a professional-looking site presentation to be
important
 Website must have elegant overall design

8. PEOPLE’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING
INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET
Advertising
 Ads on websites must not distract user from site
content

9. PEOPLE’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING
INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET
Readability
 Content shouldn’t be too complicated or
dense, should be easily understood by ordinary
people
 Content must not descend into hyperbole, must be
serious and to the point

10. PEOPLE’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING
INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET
Outbound Links
 If a trusted site provides links to other
websites, people assume they are trustworthy as
well

11. PEOPLE’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING
INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET
Picture of the Site Owner
 People assume a site is trustworthy if a picture of
the site owner is provided and the person in it is
smiling and looks likeable.

12. PEOPLE’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING
INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET
Email
 People want the ability to contact the provider of the
website and the owner must write back to them

13. PEOPLE’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING
INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET
Credentials and Qualifications
 Evidence that a site owner is qualified to provide
health and medical information should be given (i.e.
references to his previous work or curriculum vitae)

14. PEOPLE’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING
INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET
Updating of Content
 Content of website should be recent, and site itself
should indicate that it is updated frequently or at
regular intervals

15. PEOPLE’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING
INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET
Quality Seal and Third Party Endorsements
 People consider it preferable if seals of approval
from the Federal Department of Health sanctioning
content are provided

16. PEOPLE’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING
INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET
 Overall, people consider the internet a useful and convenient
tool for retrieving very general health and medical information
 “Websites from official authorities, a professional
layout, understandable and professional writing, and citation
of scientific references were the most often mentioned criteria
for trustworthiness” (Eysenbach 7)
 Users stated that they were pleased about the newfound
opportunities the Internet provided to verify information given
to them by their physicians, but made it clear that, vice
versa, they would always verify with their physicians the
information they found on the internet

17. OBSERVATIONS MADE DURING
THE STUDY

18. OBSERVATIONS MADE DURING THE STUDY
 Participants did not make use of medical portals, sites of
medical societies or libraries as a starting point
 The search strategies employed by the participants were
predominantly vague and ineffective means of looking up
information (i.e. did not make frequent use of multiple term
combinations, picked only the first result on the list before
rephrasing search)
 In spite of their strategies, participants were “very successful”
in finding the information that allowed them to answer the
questions
 In spite of the statements made during the focus groups, none
of the participants researched the owners of the websites or
how the information had been compiled

19. SOME GENERAL THOUGHTS TO
CONSIDER
 What does this study teach us about the ways in
which people search for medical information on the
internet?
 In what ways do the participants’ criteria for
assessing medical information on the internet cross
over into the concept of cognitive authority?
 Think back to our discussions about Bates’
Berrypicking model. Do the strategies employed by
the participants of the study bear any similarities to
this? If yes, how?