I was reading this article this morning. All the websites mentioned here are in the UK, but I was wondering how the questions raised in the article applies to the way websites for medical information are built in the U.S.? One thing I did notice is that all the sites are different. Each site requires learning new navigational information. There are no standard rules for presentation on the web. Would it not be better to find a way to optimize the presentation of certain types of information? Should there not be a medical group, in concert with a web design group, be working to create a "Roberts Rules of Order" for the presentation of medical information on the web. — Jack
BBC NEWS | Health | Diabetes websites too complicated:
Diabetes websites too complicated
Language used was beyond average comprehension
Online health advice for people with diabetes is often too complex to understand, analysis suggests.
A scientist at Bath University looked at pages about diabetes on 15 internet health sites run mainly by charities and official bodies.
He found people would need a reading ability of an educated 11 to 17-year-old to understand the sites.
However, he said the average reading age of people in the UK was equivalent to an educated nine-year-old.
Complicated language
Dr Maged Boulos from Bath University found the NHS Direct Online site was the hardest to understand.
People would need the reading ability of an educated person aged 16 to comprehend information, he estimated.
Other difficult sites were NetDoctor.co.uk, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation UK, and the British Diabetic Association which required a reading age of at least 15."
(Related link Diabetes UK.)
(Related link NHSdirect.)
(Related link netdoctor.co.uk.)
(Related link Juvenile Diabetes.)
(Related link Prodigy.Net.)
(Related link University College London Hospitals.)
(Related link BestTreatments.)
7:29:12 AM.
