Table 2 Contents of mDISCERN, GQS and Readability indexes.
mDISCERN criteria | Total score (8–40 points) |
|---|---|
1. Are the aims clear? | 1–5 point |
2. Does it achieve its aims? | 1–5 point |
3. Is it relevant? | 1–5 point |
4. Is it clear what sources of information were used to compile the publication (other than the author or producer)? | 1–5 point |
5. Is it clear when the information used or reported in the publication was produced? | 1–5 point |
6. Is it balanced and unbiased? | 1–5 point |
7. Does it provide details of additional sources of support and information? | 1–5 point |
8. Does it refer to areas of uncertanity? | 1–5 point |
GQS | Score |
|---|---|
Poor quality, poor flow of the site, most information missing, not at all useful for patients | 1 |
Generally poor quality and poor flow, some information listed but many important topics missing, of very limited use to patients | 2 |
Moderate quality, suboptimal flow, some important information is adequately discussed but others poorly discussed, somewhat useful for patients | 3 |
Good quality and generally good flow, most of the relevant information is listed, but some topics not covered, useful for patients | 4 |
Excellent quality and excellent flow, very useful for patients | 5 |
Readability indexes | Formula |
|---|---|
Flesch reading ease score (FRE) | 206.835−1015 × (W/S)−84.6 × (B/W) |
Flesch–Kincaid grade level (FKGL) | 0.39 × (W/S) + 11.8 × (B/W)−15.59 |
Simple measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) | 1.0430 × √C + 3.1291 |
Gunning FOG Index (GFI) | 0.4 × [(W/S) + 100 × (C*/W)] |
Coleman–Liau Index (CLI) | (0.0588 × L)−(0.296 × S*)−15.8 |
