The Next Time You Google a Health-Related Information

With the advancement of technology, Google has become a popular search engine. Google is a broad search tool with access to a variety of information in multiple fields of study. People tend to use Google first to obtain a general idea of aspects of the information they seek. However, people should pay more attention to what is inputted into the search engine because the generated results are affected by words in the search box. Depending on how specific the information sought is, try using keywords and search commands like “AND”, “OR”, parenthesis, quotes, which optimizes the search on Google. While one can control what is inputted in Google, one cannot completely control the generated results. Therefore, vetting the generated results is paramount.

Google is merely an open platform connecting other platforms, both curated and uncurated. Incorporating search commands for health-related Google search increases the probability of results from curated platforms like Google Scholar, WHO, NCBI, Ovid, EBSCOhost, SAGE, PsycINFO and more. These platforms have collections of journals and journal articles, books, editorials, etc, which are usually peer-reviewed. Although some information on these platforms may have to be purchased, one can still get free solid information. The evaluation of the information found through these platforms increases the confidence in the quality of information.

Vetting the Quality of Information

With the enormous amount of misinformation circulating the internet, vetting the quality of information online is critical. Elements that influence the quality of information are outlined below, with questions people can ask when vetting the information.

The credibility of the author(s) (Patwardhan et al., 2018)

• How well does the educational or occupational background of the author equip the author’s knowledge and evaluation of the topic? What conflicts of interest exist?

The credibility of the journal/database/organization (Patwardhan et al., 2018)

• Does the journal/database/organization have a thorough review process for approving articles? How accessible is the website of the journal/database/organization?

The validity of the information (Taherdoost, 2016)

• How accurate are the measures used to obtain the information? Does the method used measure what is intended to be measured? What potential biases exist? Are there restrictions on the generalizability of the data from which the information is inferred?

The reliability of the information (Taherdoost, 2016)

• How consistent is the information when compared across multiple sources? Did another article arrive at a different result, all other things being equal?

The relevance of the information (Kukucka, 2020)

• How old is the information? Has new information that counters the information emerged? Has the methodology used to obtain the information advanced since publication?

Tracking Your Information Sources

Tracking where an information is obtained from makes referencing the source easier. Various tools such as EndNote, Mendeley, RefWorks, Web of Science, could be used for tracking and storing information sources. Although these tools may not be familiar to most people, more common word space tools like Google Doc, Microsoft Word, OneNote, Notability, and more can be just as effective. You could have one of these word tools opened during your search, in which the references to the information can be posted with the link for easier retrieval of the information. Beneath each reference, you could include a summary of the content and inferences obtained.

During your synthesis of good information, consider having conversations about the subject area with experts in the field of study or people with substantial experience to have an objective dialogue. These conversations build a stronger relationship with these experts in your network, and you may get insights you had not considered previously.

References

Kukucka J. (2020). People who live in ivory towers shouldn't throw stones: A refutation of Curley et al. Forensic science international. Synergy, 2, 110–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2020.03.001

Patwardhan, B., Nagarkar, S., Gadre, S. R., Lakhotia, S. C., Katoch, V. M., & Moher, D. (2018). A critical analysis of the 'UGC-approved list of journals'. Current Science (00113891), 114(6). https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e619/17437e875cb98d5aa97fb05b1ce114002a3d.pdf

Taherdoost, H. (2016). Validity and reliability of the research Instrument: how to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research. International Journal of Academic Research in Management, 5, 28-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205040