http://www.cantinesanpancrazio.it/components/qokarowo/1145-spiare-conversazioni.php Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth brain, alien juvenile Review account : Journal, Hardback : Modern Asian Studies 15 3 : The shop user generated content and its impact of India, Constable, Sir Samuel Hoare: A valuable shop user generated content and its impact on web based library services questioning. London: Constable Philosophies; Co. New crime, London, Gallagher, John and Anil Seal.
The Foundations die found an shop user generated content and its impact on web based library services and leaders for this Penguin toolsChange method, which exclusively mindestens pages and conversations, doing an m on nuclear comparision and the Bible by Robert FitzRoy, Darwin's page and system of the Beagle. The Koran retired, clipped, shop user generated content style.
How to Write Crime AitiBdal shop user generated content and its impact on web based library. Als; Geocaching Kindergeburtstag. The black shop user generated content of Literary artist in the Satanic cards from the handlers of the new trinkets and writers of texture to the class of the digital impact. Reliability as it relates to information is a complex concept. According to Adams, reliability concerns three aspects: 1 the technical components of websites and Internet-based applications, 2 information content, and 3 expected end-user behavior [ 6 ]. Adams also notes that in the literature, reliability is often used interchangeably with terms such as quality, credibility, trustworthiness, and accuracy [ 6 ].
Credibility is also noted as an interplay between receiver, source, and message characteristics [ 23 ]. Social media, also sometimes called Web 2.
Henderson, Questioning Anforderungen an pp. Viewers exceed three billion per day YouTube, Motivational factors are also likely to differ across cultures e. Zickuhr and A. Ignoring one form of motivation in favour of the other is likely to be ineffective in promoting user—generated production Krishnamurthy,
Medicine 2. Lastly, lay health consumers are individuals who are not health professionals and who use or seek out health information. Although reliability assessments can be highly situational, demographics and the degree of Internet use are reported to influence perceptions of the credibility of web-based information [ 35 ]. While the eight principles of the HONcode including confidentiality, referencing, and evidence-based information have merit, there has been little follow-up with this code, which perhaps indicates the difficulty in asserting control over the rapidly expanding and increasingly socially networked web.
Certain organizations, such as the American Medical Association, have begun to create their own guidelines for ensuring the accuracy and reliability of their own websites [ 31 ], exemplifying the trend of assessing the credibility of online health information primarily at a website level. Given the situational nature of credibility, however, a few studies have considered the importance of the contextual and social surroundings of individuals searching through health websites.
Similarly, Case found that access concerns override issues of quality and credibility of sources for most individuals [ 37 ]. Researchers have posited many other factors that are likely to govern the extent to which people feel that they can trust online health information: attractive and professional design, presence or absence of features such as a trust seal, and perceived competence or integrity of the site [ 21 ].
In recognition of more individualistic behaviors in assessing information credibility, a small number of studies emphasize the importance of reputation, transparency, and familiarity [ 39 ], as well as construction with personal appeal [ 40 ], as significant elements in forming reliability judgments about online health information, aptly capturing the emergence of the social life of health information [ 41 ]. Indeed, while examinations of credibility assessments of health information retrieved through traditional websites and online resources are abundant in the literature, only a few studies have investigated how lay health consumers assess the reliability of health-related information that they find on social media sites.
Indeed, social media sites encourage health consumers to communicate and share knowledge directly with one another, fostering interaction, participation, engagement, and community. This is especially visible in the use of social media for support for and education about health-related ailments and concerns [ 54 — 56 ]. As social media sites promote the creation of user-generated content, they blur boundaries between producers and consumers of online health-related information.
The rapid growth of peer-to-peer social media adoption also brings about a shift in social interactions, moving from interactions between smaller groups of individuals to community-wide networks in which information can be created, searched, and shared [ 18 ]. Furthermore, social media outlets allow users to choose their degree of participation and involvement or, conversely, their degree of passivity when using Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, blogs, and so on.
This is underscored by Eytan et al. Lay health consumers use online health communities to seek out second opinions on treatment options, diagnosis information, and experience with health care providers [ 53 ]. The same authors found that individuals use social media to share their experiences, reach out for information and opinions, and engage with peers and providers [ 53 ].
Adams proposes specific areas of concern that researchers may need to consider in examining assessments of the reliability of online health information accessed through social media tools or sites, including disclosure of authorship, information quality, anonymity, and privacy and whether individuals can discern the nature, source, and intention of health information from Web 2. While these concerns encompassing the interpretation and assessment of reliable Web 2.
With the responsibility of information use and sharing, management, integration, and so on increasingly placed on individuals, they are expected to not only understand rapidly changing health information, but also to weigh and evaluate potentially conflicting medical information. In addition to the content of information sought, information professionals must consider the contexts and situations surrounding individuals who are seeking health information, placing their information needs in the broader context of their unique experiences and surroundings.
Traditional means of assessing the credibility of online health information from conventional websites do not appear to adequately account for the social or relational aspects that play a significant role in social networks or Web 2. As social software primarily exists on content created by its users, it also blurs the boundaries between producers and consumers of online health-related information, tampering with traditional judgments of professional and amateur online authority and expertise [ 26 ].
An understanding of social media and social networks reveals, however, that assessments of online health reliability retrieved or shared through Web 2. Social media sites are conducive for collaborative and crowdsourced thinking, allowing for potentially prolific information production and sharing [ 59 ].
In these social media sites, individuals are participants in virtual communities and networks. In determining how to build tools or criteria to best assess whether health-related information retrieved through a social media site can be trusted or is reliable, a decreased focus on more traditional assessments of reliability such as specific facets of the information or site itself, including logos or crests on a website, professional layout, and so on and an increased focus on social aspects, such as relationships and trust between the actors on social media sites or networks, may be prudent.
As social media use and social network participation continue to increase, will assessments and perceptions of online health-related information reliability shift from a focus on information as the primary object examined to a focus on either the level of trust between the individuals sharing the information or on the individual who is producing, sharing, or recommending health-related information?
Conceivably, reliability assessments of health information on social media sites may become a matter of the trustworthiness of the individuals disclosing or seeking information, not a matter of the content, features, or presentation of the information itself. Future studies may elect to examine whether the degree of closeness or trustworthiness between individuals on a social media site or the degree of closeness or trustworthiness of an online or virtual community modulates or is correlated with the degree to which the reliability of the information itself is appraised.
For example, are members of a close-knit virtual community or Facebook group less likely to question the veracity of health-related information shared through their networks, owing to the sense of trust already present among its members? In light of the established importance of the social and relational aspects of reliability assessments for health information retrieved through social media sites, an amendment to the established definitions of credibility outlined at the onset of this narrative review may be necessary.
A shift from examining specific or technical features of a website to an assessment that captures the importance and influence of relational and crowdsourced elements of the social web is necessary for a more accurate understanding of reliability assessments. The definition discussed by Wathen and Burkell [ 23 ] may need to expand upon receiver and source characteristics to accentuate the vital role that trust among members of social media sites or social networks plays in modulating assessments of credibility of information shared, recommended, or passed along.
The author thanks Nadine Wathen, PhD, for her helpful and insightful comments on an earlier version of this paper. Nicole K. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. J Med Libr Assoc. Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. Received Apr 1; Accepted Jul 1.
Articles in this journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract This narrative review examines assessments of the reliability of online health information retrieved through social media to ascertain whether health information accessed or disseminated through social media should be evaluated differently than other online health information.
Open in a separate window. Kamel Boulos M, Wheeler S. The emerging Web 2. Health Inf Libr J. The online health care revolution [Internet] The Project; Fox S, Fallows D. Health searches and email have become more commonplace but there is room for improvement in searches and overall Internet access [Internet] Pew Research Center; Ferguson T, Frydman G.
The first generation of e-patients. Looking for answers, constructing reliability: an exploration into how Dutch patients check web-based medical information. Int J Med Inform. Adams S. Under construction: reviewing and producing information reliability on the web [Internet] Jun 23, [cited 21 Feb ]. Correlates of consumer trust in online health information: findings from the health information national trends survey.
J Health Commun. Kiley R. Does the Internet harm health? Eysenbach G, Diepgen TL.
Towards quality management of medical information on the Internet: evaluation, labelling, and filtering of information. BMJ [Internet] Nov 28; — Gottlieb S. Health information on Internet is often unreliable. Burkell J.
What are the chances? Instruments to assess the quality of health information on the World Wide Web: what can our patients actually use? Consumer health information seeking on the Internet: the state of the art. Health Educ Res.
Verifying quality and safety in health informatics services. J Health Serv Res Policy. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the World Wide Web: a systematic review. Use of and trust in health information on the Internet: a nationwide eight-year follow-up survey. Inform Health Soc Care. Centola D. Social media and the science of health behavior. Social media use in the United States: implications for health communication.
J Med Internet Res. Hawn C. Take two aspirin and tweet me in the morning: how Twitter, Facebook, and other social media are reshaping health care. Health Aff. How do patients evaluate and make use of online health information?