MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three search engines (Google, Yahoo!, and Bing) were searched. The first 20 consecutive websites from each engine were obtained and checked for eligibility. For the quality of the websites, the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode), the DISCERN tool, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmarks, and Google PageRank were used for the assessment of the included websites. For readability, an online web tool was used, including well-known analyzing indices [Flesch Kincaid grade level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE)]. The acceptable readability level was set to be ≥80.0 for the FRE and <7 for the FKGL and SMOG. The data were presented in frequencies and percentages.
RESULTS: Out of the 60 screened websites, 14 websites were eligible for analysis. There was only one (7.1%) website that had the HONcode seal. The mean score of all websites based on the DISCERN tool was 29.6 ± 12.1, with no website achieved the high score (≥65). Only one (7.1%) website scored >5 based on Google PageRank. Regarding JAMA benchmarks, all websites achieved a mean score of 2.57 ± 1.1. The mean grade level based on the FKGL was 8.4 ± 6.3. All websites had a score of <7 according to the SMOG index. The mean score of the readability ease index was 90.5 ± 16.4.
CONCLUSION: Most of the dental health information on denture hygiene available on the Arabic websites did not have the required level of quality, regardless of being readable and comprehensible by most of the general people.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Directing the patients to the appropriate websites related to their cases is the responsibility of the dentists.
METHODS: National principal investigators from 30 countries were asked if the original PIS/ICF was edited in their countries and, if so, to share with us the one used to recruit participants. We assessed whether the 25 different elements of information from the good clinical practice guidelines and the Declaration of Helsinki were present in, deficiently described, or absent from the PIS/ICFs.
RESULTS: Nineteen national principal investigators responded: eight (Argentina, Brazil, Ethiopia, Georgia, Iran, Lebanon, Lithuania, and Malaysia) stated that no edits were introduced to the original PIS/ICF; eight (Canada, Colombia, Philippines, India, Ireland, Pakistan, Portugal, and Switzerland) added some elements of information in the national PIS/ICF; and three (Italy, Peru, and Spain) reported not participating in the trial. None of the elements included in the original PIS/ICF were omitted from the edited PIS/IFC. Six elements of information were omitted and five deficiently described in the original PIS/ICF. The number of elements omitted from the edited PIS/ICFs varied (range = 2-5). Nine PIS/ICFs incompletely described or omitted the informing of study participants about the study results, while five deficiently described or omitted the anticipated expenses for trial participation. Information concerning whom to contact for more information or in case of injury was deficient in six PIS/ICFs. Unlike the original PIS/ICF, all edited PIS/ICFs informed participants about the existence of compensation or treatment for any injury related to the trial.
CONCLUSIONS: WHO should consider adding three of the omitted elements in PIS/ICFs of future multinational similar trials.
METHODS: In this infodemiological study, the Google, Yahoo!, and Bing search engines were searched using specific Arabic terms on periodontal disease. The first 100 consecutive websites from each engine were obtained. The eligible websites were categorized as commercial, health/professional, journalism, and other. The following tools were applied to assess the quality of the information on the included websites: the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode), the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, and the DISCERN tool. The readability was assessed using an online readability tool.
RESULTS: Of the 300 websites, 89 were eligible for quality and readability analyses. Only two websites (2.3%) were HONcode certified. Based on the DISCERN tool, 43 (48.3%) websites had low scores. The mean score of the JAMA benchmarks was 1.6 ± 1.0, but only 3 (3.4%) websites achieved "yes" responses for all four JAMA criteria. Based on the DISCERN tool, health/professional websites revealed the highest quality of information compared to other website categories. Most of the health/professional websites revealed moderate-quality information, while 55% of the commercial websites, 66% of journalism websites, and 43% of other websites showed poor quality information. Regarding readability, most of the analyzed websites presented simple and readable written content.
CONCLUSIONS: Aside from readable content, Arabic health information on the analyzed websites on periodontal disease is below the required level of quality.
Method: A quasi-experimental study was conducted using 254 first-year medical students with no prior exposure to the lecture topic during the 2016/17 and 2017/18 academic sessions. The students from each batch were divided into two groups and exposed to different video material. Group A watched an action movie, while Group B watched an educational video related to the lecture topic. After 15 min, both groups attended a lecture on the gross anatomy of the heart, which was delivered by a qualified anatomist. At the end of the lecture, their understanding of the material was measured through a post-lecture test using ten vetted multiple choice true/false questions.
Results: Group B's test scores were found to be significantly higher than Group A's (p > 0.001, t-stats [df] = -4.21 [252]).
Conclusion: This study concluded that the pre-lecture activity had successfully provided the students with some prior knowledge of the subject before they attended the lecture sessions. This finding was aligned with cognitive load theory, which describes a reduction in learners' cognitive load when prior knowledge is stimulated.
METHODS: The module was developed as an iterative and review process by five experts in nutrition and dietetics, periodontics, and dental public health. It consisted of three phases: (i) needs assessment on module contents and characteristics, (ii) module development and (iii) module evaluation by experts. Twelve healthcare professionals aged between 30 and 53 years (average 13.5 years of working experience) validated the module contents and its comprehensibility using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for printable materials (PEMAT-P) and audio-visual materials (PEMAT-A/V). Scores of 0 (disagree) or 1 (agree) were given for sets of understandability and actionability statements and presented as a total percentage.
RESULTS: Seventeen infographic-flip charts and 13 short-videos were developed in the Malay language and grouped into four topics: (i) Introduction to Diabetes and Periodontitis, (ii) Diabetes and Periodontitis Care, (iii) Lifestyle Modification, and (iv) Myths and Facts. Flip charts were rated between 76-100% for understandability and 80-100% for actionability, while videos rated between 90-100% for understandability and 100% for actionability, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Overall, the newly developed module ranked high median scores for understandability and actionability. This finding reflects positive acceptance of the integrated module among the various healthcare professionals involved in managing patients with diabetes and periodontitis.