Pew: Health Searchers Don't Check Their Sources
The Pew Internet and American Life project has released a fascinating study that looks at how people search for health information online. First, unsurprisingly, eight out of every ten Internet users in the US go online for health information. However, they're not looking closely at what they find.
What's notable here is that 75% percent of those who search for health information do not check the source or the date of the information they find. Given how well blogs, message boards, social networks and Wikipedia rank in search results, it's highly likely that individuals are being swayed by what's published in these sources - even if its inaccurate. One third of patients talked to their doctor about what they did find online.
Last week I spoke to Susannah Fox, Associate Director, at Pew, to get a better understanding for the study. Her are excerpts from our email interview.
MP: What was the biggest surprise to you in your findings?
SF:The biggest surprise for me was the decreasing percentage of health seekers (internet users who look for health information online) to check the source and date of the medical advice - health
information they find. Expert organizations like the Medical Library Association, URAC, Consumer WebWatch, and the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services have been trying to publicize the importance of checking these quality indicators, but it seems clear that most internet users are not getting the message.
But that goes along with the other surprise -- the internet is a place where people find reassurance about their health care decisions. I had not expected to find that three-quarters of health seekers felt that way after their last search, which suggests that they believe that what they are finding online is high-quality. And more than half of health seekers say their last online health information session gave them
confidence to raise new questions or concerns about a health issue with their doctor. So much health care decision-making happens outside the doctor's office, and apparently a lot of it is happening near a
computer.
MP: How often do you think patients are running into peer-created content such as blogs, message boards, etc. when conducting their searches?
SF: Your second question is a really interesting one. We found in this survey that most people are starting at a search engine, but we don't know what their search terms are and we don't know where they end up. We also don't know how many people run across health information as they go about their daily routines online -- checking in on their favorite blogs might get them thinking about skin cancer (see Dooce.com last summer). The Pew Internet Project has been tracking the rise of blogs and social networks online and we have done some research about peer-support groups online, but I'm very interested in exploring these areas in more detail.
MP: Are patients generally better informed or less informed by what they find? What is the perception vs. the reality?
SF: Our study does not address the third question about whether health seekers are actually better informed (or if they just feel better informed) but there is a growing body of research that is looking at this issue.
Clearly, people are turning to search for health information, ignoring the source and then going online to find peers for further reassurance. This represents a huge fundamental shift in healthcare. No longer do the health professionals hold all the cards. The patient is empowered with information that may very often be inaccurate, and they are basing at least some of their decisions on it.
This should hopefully encourage more healthcare companies to join the conversation. While they are severely hampered by the challenges of regulation, healthcare providers and pharmas can and should play a role in helping individuals find quality information from their peers and other sources. It's already happening and perhaps to their detriment since a lot of it is inaccurate information.
