Nursing Informatics - Essay Example

? Nursing Informatics Nursing Informatics Introduction Acquiring information in the internet is as easy as one click. In fact, the internet has gained a substantial popularity as the most accessible source of information. Even in the field of health care, one can find a vast array of information on the World Wide Web which has raised the concerns of the reader and researcher regarding the quality of information produced in the internet. As an individual navigates through different search results, one may notice that some information provided in each sources have inconsistencies, unclear definition and quality, and inefficient search engine itself. Some nurses prefer the Internet in answering clinical questions and searching for updates in the field of health care. In this case, nurses who are often using Internet searches are encouraged to develop a list of trusted health-information websites known for credibility. Advance skills are necessary to evaluate and appraise a health-related website as well as a criterion guide to ensure the quality of websites being accessed routinely. Website Critique: Medline Plus To ensure the quality of the health-related websites being used by nurses, a critical appraisal or critique of the selected website is necessary. The criterion outlined by Thede and Sewell (2010) will be used in this website critique and which will evaluate the Medline website in terms of source, funding, and validity. Source. The author of the Medline Plus is the U.S. National Library of Medicine with Donald A.B. Lindberg as the director. Medline plus caters links to different sources which specified individual authors of various specific articles. Medline Plus is being sponsored by the National Institutes of Health. Most of the nurses around the globe viewed Medline plus as a credible source of information due to the reason that the information Medline plus releases comes from recognized authorities and credible organizations, such as the National Institute of Health of the U.S. The director of Medline Plus, Donald Lindberg, is a known expert in the field of health, most especially in applying informatics in health care, pathology, and in journal publications. Meanwhile, the organization U.S. NLM is qualified and legally permitted to write the information. The affiliation of the sponsors are outlined in the copyright section where the website delineates affiliation to credible sources such as the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database Consumer Version, A.D.A.M. Medical Encyclopedia, Patient Education Institute, Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary, ORLive, HealthDay and Reuters, and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. There isn’t a link identified that will allow the user to contact the author however, Medline Plus has provided a contact form to answer users’ queries and if user’s browser does not work with forms, alternative emails and phone number are provided to communicate queries directly to the customer service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine. Funding. Most of the content of Medline Plus website is available at no charge. That is because the primary purpose of Medline Plus website is merely educational and not to sell product or service. Commercial funding is not stated in the website but in the disclaimer section, it has been stated that the U.S. government provides fund for the website. Some advertisements are present in the website but Medline Plus makes sure that advertisers follow the advertising policy of Medline Plus by clearly stating the difference between content and advertising. Advertisers or sponsors must not play a role in selecting or editing information (Medline Plus, 2011). Advertisements and directories of health professionals, services, and facilities might be included in the website but Medline Plus does not recommend or endorse these services. In addition, any potential conflict of interest with the users will exclude linked organizations and Web sources from the list of Medline Plus. Validity and Quality. The site was last updated on September 7, 2011 and was clearly specified at the bottom of the website’s page. The purpose of the website, which is to educate the user, was clearly stated. The information is accurate and referenced to current scholarly nursing and medical resources demonstrated by clear identification of the source of the content of Web page(s) and the authority responsible for maintaining the website. Included information in the Medline Plus is current or in an update date with information being peer-reviewed or verified by advisory board members or consultants in the site. Medline Plus assures users of a site free from content and typing errors by currently updating information and affiliating with reliable medical dictionary and encyclopedia such as A.D.A.M. Encyclopedia and Merriam-Webster Dictionary. As stated earlier, the site does not endorse any health professional, services, or products, thus, users are rest assured that information presented are free biases and opinions. Medline Plus only links to reliable and quality reputable sources and makes sure that all the links provided are functioning; if not, authorities will exclude non-functioning links or Web sources. Privacy. Medline Plus includes a privacy statement that is easily understood. The site does not collect personal information from the users unless users voluntarily give the information to the Website master. However, some type data are collected such as Internet address and domain from which users visited the NLM Web site, information about the operating system and browser used, date and time of the visit, pages visited, Internet address of the Web site that connected users to the NLM Web site, and words searched are collected to help Medline Plus better understand how the public uses the site and how to make it more helpful (Medline Plus, 2011). As part of the privacy statement, Medline Plus does not collect information for commercial marketing or any purpose unrelated to the NLM’s function. In addition to the privacy statement, a Website must meet a recognized privacy standard such as “Health on the Net (HON)”. The HON has Eight Code of Conduct for Medical and Health Websites and includes authoritative, complementarity, privacy, attribution, justifiability, transparency, financial disclosure, and advertising policy (HON, 2011). Of the eight codes of conduct for medical and health websites addressed, Medline Plus has met all the requirements of HON, giving strong emphasis on the privacy standards of the Website. Thede and Sewell Criterion Importance. The Thede and Sewell criterion in critiquing a Website is a very important tool not only for the health-allied professionals but also to the general users. A lot of information regarding health topics can be searched on the internet with just one click. Without Thede and Sewell criteria, one may find it hard to find the right Website to use in research or health queries. In addition, Thede and Sewell criteria helps user to discern a credible, updated, valid, and quality Websites. Users are also made aware of the privacy statement and accreditation by HON. With spread of cybercrime, users intend to use Internet sources where personal identification will not be disclosed and in this aspect, the Thede and Sewell has alleviated the fears and worries of most users by helping users to analyze the privacy section of a Website. In addition, the accreditation of HON being included in the Thede and Sewell criteria helps user to determine the reliability and credibility of Website sources which other criteria for critiquing Website sources don’t have. The Thede and Sewell criteria intend not to devalue the content of the Website; rather, the criteria critically appraise the Website by emphasizing to the users the qualities of a good Website. Assumptions. On the assumption that Thede and Sewell’s criteria include the HON standards, source identification, funding specifications, information update, and privacy statement, users can infer that Medline Plus has passed the criteria of Thede and Sewell’s and therefore, a Website that offers safety and security of information of users, credibility of author, protection of users’ interests, updated information free from biases, and preservation of users’ privacy. Ranking Criteria. All of the criteria presented by Thede and Sewell’s are of equal importance in justifying the quality of a good Website source from the one that is not. However, if I would personally rank the Thede and Sewell’s criteria according to importance, I would rank the criteria as follows: privacy, validity and quality, source, and funding. Protection from accessing a Website must be a user’s priority first to protect personal information and avoid complications of cybercrime. Validity and quality is the second priority to make sure that health information acquired is updated and avoid conflicts or complications brought by not reading an updated Website (for instance, aspirin is no longer a drug of choice for headache as it may aggravate thrombolytic conditions). The source ranked third because when users’ are accessing and reading a Website’s article, it is the information presented that was look first and not the authors themselves. Knowing the background of the author is just secondary to the quality of information presented. The last criterion on my list is the source of funds. Users like me would pay for the information presented if needed, provided that the Website’s information has met personal criteria of quality information, privacy, and security. References HON. (2011). Health on the Net Foundation: Non-Governmental Organization. Geneva: HON. Retrieved from http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Patients/Conduct.html. Medline Plus. (2011). Medline Plus: Trusted Health Information for You. Maryland: U.S. National Library of Medicine. Retrieved from http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/. Read More