The document discusses various types of health information sources, categorizing them into educational and non-profit websites, government sites, private company websites, personal blogs, social media, online discussion groups, news articles, medical wikis, and medical journals. Each source type is evaluated based on its reliability, potential biases, and the nature of the information provided, with educational and government sites identified as among the best sources. It emphasizes the importance of critically evaluating each source before trusting the information presented.

1. Types of Health Information Sources
Now that we have a better idea of what makes a good source, let’s
take a look at different types of information sources and consider the
pros and cons of each. We will focus on the following source types:
• Educational and non-profit websites
• Government websites
• Websites owned by private companies
• Personal blogs
• Social media sites
• Online discussion groups or forums
• News articles
• Medical wikis
• Medical journals

2. Educational and Non-Profit Sites
These websites will end with a .edu or .org address.
They exist to educate, rather than to make a profit.
They are among the best sites to consult for
information.
These sites are often good sources of health
information because they generally provide unbiased
information with the purpose of educating patients.
Their information is typically written in plain language
and reviewed by medical professionals.

3. Educational and Non-Profit Sites
Be aware that educational sites may sometimes be written by
students, and that even non-profit sites may promote an
agenda, so it is still critical that you evaluate a source before
you use it.
Examples: mayoclinic.org, mlanet.org, health.harvard.edu

4. Government Websites
These websites will end with a .gov address. They are
run by the federal government and provide factual
information for consumers. They are also among the
best sources to consult.
Government websites are highly accountable for the
information that they provide, as they are funded by
taxpayers. Information is usually kept current and is
written in plain language.

5. Government Websites
Be advised that even government websites are not free
from bias. While these websites often strive to be
objective, lobbyists may place pressure on the
government to promote an agenda.
Examples: medlineplus.gov, fda.gov, cdc.gov, nih.gov

6. Websites Owned by Private Companies
These websites end in a .com address, and are generally
not as reliable as .edu, .org, or .gov sites.
Source evaluation is critical on these websites because
they may be biased from the motivation to make a
profit, they may have sponsored content that is not
clearly identified, and they are not always written by
medical professionals. In addition, information is not
always kept current.

7. Websites Owned by Private Companies
However, not all .com websites are poor sources of
information. Some of them are regularly reviewed by
professionals and may exist purely to educate
consumers.
Examples: webmd.com, healthline.com, anthem.com,
menshealth.com

8. Personal Blogs
These websites express the personal opinions of an
individual. They are written in plain language, and new
posts are added frequently.
In general, blogs are not a great source of health
information because they are based on opinions. They also
may have sponsored content, which further contributes to
bias. Some are better than others, as some are written by
doctors and others are not, but even the best ones do not
undergo extensive review.
Examples: wellnessmama.com, hungryhealthhappy.com,
healthbean.ca

9. THINK!
Why should you avoid using a blog for medical
information even if it’s run by a doctor?

10. THINK!
Why should you avoid using a blog for medical
information even if it’s run by a doctor?
ANSWER: Information you find on blogs is generally an
opinion, not a fact. An opinion from a doctor is still
just that: an opinion. In addition, blogs do not go
under an the extensive review process that you see
with other websites. Always consider the context in
addition to the authority of the author.

11. Social Media Websites
Most internet users have connected to social media at
one time or another. You can find all sorts of
information on social media sites, so it should not be
surprising that it can be a source of health
information.
In general, social media is not a good source of health
information. Anyone can post on social media, so you
cannot assume that what you find is accurate. Social
media content is not reviewed in any way, and many
posts are sponsored and reflect a biased perspective.

12. Social Media Websites
However, it is possible to find good information on social
media. Some doctors use sites like Facebook and Twitter
to share information. If you find something intriguing on
one of these sites, check for a source. If there is a source,
you can track it down and evaluate the information for
yourself. If no source is included, you should disregard it.
Social media also has the benefit of allowing for real-time
interactions, so it can be a good place to find the latest
information about a topic.
Examples: facebook.com, twitter.com, instagram.com

13. Online Discussion Groups and Forums
Online discussion boards always users to communicate
with and support others who face similar medical
concerns.
On these websites, users may discuss methods of
coping with a long-term illness, ask for opinions about
treatment options, or consider the implications of new
research.

14. Online Discussion Groups and Forums
While these sites are an important source of social
support, they do face some of the same concerns that we
see with social media sites.
Contributors may have extensive knowledge about a topic,
but they are not medically trained. Content is not formally
reviewed, although users may actively moderate their
communities and remove inaccurate content as it is found.
In general, these sites are a good source of support, but
they should not replace the advice of a doctor.
Examples: listserv.acor.org, caregiveraction.org/forum

15. News Articles
Most popular news outlets often report on the latest
health-related news that they think will interest their
audiences.
As such, these articles can be a good way to learn the
latest information about a health topic that is written
in plain language that is easy to understand. Content is
reviewed in accordance with journalistic standards.

16. News Articles
However, news articles are not an ideal source because
they are not written by medical professionals. Therefore, it
is especially important that you check that any studies are
properly cited.
They are not free from bias, either, despite their authors
best intentions. Many media outlets show a political bias.
They also have sponsors that may have subtle influences
on their content. Not all news sources are created equal,
so stick to those with a good reputation.
Examples: nytimes.com, cnn.com, npr.org, khn.org

17. THINK!
Why do some news sites end in .com while others end
in .org? Does the difference in web address affect your
overall judgment of the media source?

18. THINK!
Why do some news sites end in .com while others end
in .org? Does the difference in web address affect your
overall judgment of the media source?
ANSWER: News sites ending in .com are run by
companies and make a profit, whereas .org sites are
run by non-profit organizations. This distinction leads
.org sites to generally be the better source of health
information because they will likely have less bias.

19. Medical Wikis
Medical wikis are sites that are run collaboratively by a
community of users. Users share the responsibility of
editing content. Most medical wikis are run by medical
professionals.
Because most articles have more than one contributor and
these contributors are not always listed on the site, it is
difficult to assess authority. In addition, these wikis are
typically written for other doctors, not patients, and may
be hard to understand. They are also not always kept
current.
Examples: wikidoc.org, askdrwiki.com, medpedia.com

20. THINK!
Is it okay to use Wikipedia as a health information
source?

21. THINK!
Is it okay to use Wikipedia as a health information
source?
ANSWER: Yes, depending on how you use it. Wikipedia
makes it easy to find very general information, but it is
not great for anything other than orienting yourself
with a topic because of concerns about authority and
credibility. Try checking the references section to find
additional resources to aid you in your search.

22. Medical Journals
Medical journals are scholarly publications that report on the
results of clinical research. They are written and reviewed
extensively by medical professionals.
Medical journals are the most accurate source of health
information.
However, they are generally not useful for the general public
because they use medical terminology and may be difficult to
understand. Articles are of very specific to a particular medical
concern and patient group, so finding relevant information can
be difficult. You may also need to purchase a subscription in
order to view their content.
Examples: jamanetwork.com/journals/jama,
www.bmj.com/theBMJ, www.nejm.org/