Answer
Evaluating the National Institutes of Health Website (https://www.nih.gov/)
Name
Institution
Professor
Course Name and Code
Date
Introduction
Technology and information management eases access to vital health information for both patients and healthcare provides, thus, improved treatment and care plans which translate to a better quality of care (Alsaleh & Alshammari, 2021). The National Institutes of Health website, https://www.nih.gov/, is a credible and reliable website that provides access to a rich library of research materials on healthcare. An analysis of the website’s ability to meet the 8 guidelines for Health on the Net certification is vital.
HONcode Guidelines
Authority
Website EvaluationThe website has listed the team of directors and secretaries in the Health and Human Sciences department. The listing includes the date an individual joined the department. This helps put a face on the people responsible for the smooth running of the website and provision of critical information.
Complementarity
In its website policy page, the website clearly indicates that the aim of the website is to provide access to research materials an it does not endorse professionals aim to replace medical personnel. Individuals should consult with their physician and only use the website for knowledge and insight.
Confidentiality
The website does not provide consent to data collection on first launch. On its privacy policy, however, it states that it collects information automatically. This information includes the previous URL before visiting the page, the under location, page visits, clicks, the operating system and browser used and the user’s IP address.
Website Evaluation
Attribution
The website and its constituent online libraries have a date of posting and the date is updated if any editing is done. The content also includes topics, authors and credible and verifiable references from where this information was obtained. Short articles on health highlights on the National Institutes of Health websites include the month and year and extensive research articles and reports include an Identification number that is used to locate the academic work.
Justifiability
The information provided is balanced and touches n all aspects on a treatment approach or care plan. Information presented included the pros and cons of a treatment or lack of. For example, the article on the power of peers focuses on the important of friends and lack of with the quality of peers being more important that the quantity.
Transparency
The site is transparent and is easy to use and navigate through. There ae links to all libraries and all categories are clearly illustrated, making it easy and fun to use.
Financial Disclosure
The website, as disclosed, is funded by the US government. There is no detailed information on the amounts provided but it indicates on its grants page that it funds biomedical research to the tune of $32 billion per year.
Advertisement
The website does not allow or encourage any advertisements on its pages. It notes that any advertisement that appears during its use may be due to third party software or other websites visited. This information is included in the disclaimers section of the web policies page.
Website Evaluation
Conclusion
The website does not meet the criteria of notifying individuals on information collected on the first launch. This should be checked as it is advisable the users receive information on what data is accessible and consent to allowing the website to do so. It meets all other criteria.
References
Alsaleh, H., & Alshammari, T. M. (2021). Direct healthcare professional communications: A quantitative assessment study. Pharmacology Research & Perspectives, 9(3), e00763.
Health on the Net guidelines. Retrieved from https://www.hon.ch/imgs/2020/EN-Guidelines-Sites_compressed.pdf
Question
• Describe examples of how technology and information management are related to the
quality and safety of patient care.
Strategy Overview
The health information available on the Internet can vary in the quality of the content. It is
important that nurses understand how to find high quality information and direct patients to
websites that are credible and trustworthy. Patients may not have the knowledge or skills to
differentiate between valid health care information and misinformation. Nurses who are aware of
and use standardized tools to appraise the quality of evidence will be better prepared to assist
their patients in searching for appropriate information. This teaching strategy helps nursing
students increase their awareness of criteria for high quality health care websites, which will help
them to discern the best available websites for their patients.
Assignment Directions
Conduct a search for a health-related website for evaluation. Websites that address specific
populations or diagnoses are acceptable. Any website or mobile app that provides health
information can be used for this evaluation but the site cannot already be Health on the Net (HON)
certified. To determine if a website is HON certified, look at the bottom of the website for the
presence or absence of the HON symbol:
Access and review the HON guidelines at HON Code
(https://www.healthonnet.org/HONcode/Guidelines/guidelines.html). There are eight principles
with an explanation of what constitutes meeting each principle. For each principle provide
information about the following:
• An analysis of the websites’ ability to meet the principle
• If the website fails to meet the principle, propose changes to improve the website
• If the website meets the principle, provide an example or excerpt from the website
Provide an overall analysis of the website to include if you would recommend this website to your
patients and why. Include a conclusion that examines the reading level of the website content (use
this calculator to determine grade level of word content: http://www.readabilityformulas.com/freefry-graph-test.php).
• Identify the target population for use of the site and the overall impression of ability to meet
the needs of the population. For example, is the reading level appropriate for the intended
audience? Why or why not?
Website Evaluation