Complementary and Alternative Medicine on Wikipedia: Opportunities for Improvement

Wikipedia, a free and collaborative Internet encyclopedia, has become one of the most popular sources of free information on the Internet. However, there have been concerns over the quality of online health information, particularly that on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). This explorat...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Malcolm Koo
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Hindawi Limited 2014-01-01
Series:Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/105186
id doaj-3fccc8c54aab42d89a693a499e4d6eb7
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3fccc8c54aab42d89a693a499e4d6eb72020-11-25T00:19:08ZengHindawi LimitedEvidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine1741-427X1741-42882014-01-01201410.1155/2014/105186105186Complementary and Alternative Medicine on Wikipedia: Opportunities for ImprovementMalcolm Koo0Department of Medical Research, Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation, Chiayi 62247, TaiwanWikipedia, a free and collaborative Internet encyclopedia, has become one of the most popular sources of free information on the Internet. However, there have been concerns over the quality of online health information, particularly that on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). This exploratory study aimed to evaluate several page attributes of articles on CAM in the English Wikipedia. A total of 97 articles were analyzed and compared with eight articles of broad categories of therapies in conventional medicine using the Mann-Whitney U test. Based on the Wikipedia editorial assessment grading, 4% of the articles attained “good article” status, 34% required considerable editing, and 56% needed substantial improvements in their content. The median daily access of the articles over the previous 90 days was 372 (range: 7–4,214). The median word count was 1840 with a readability of grade 12.7 (range: 9.4–17.7). Medians of word count and citation density of the CAM articles were significantly lower than those in the articles of conventional medicine therapies. In conclusion, despite its limitations, the general public will continue to access health information on Wikipedia. There are opportunities for health professionals to contribute their knowledge and to improve the accuracy and completeness of the CAM articles on Wikipedia.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/105186
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Malcolm Koo
spellingShingle Malcolm Koo
Complementary and Alternative Medicine on Wikipedia: Opportunities for Improvement
Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
author_facet Malcolm Koo
author_sort Malcolm Koo
title Complementary and Alternative Medicine on Wikipedia: Opportunities for Improvement
title_short Complementary and Alternative Medicine on Wikipedia: Opportunities for Improvement
title_full Complementary and Alternative Medicine on Wikipedia: Opportunities for Improvement
title_fullStr Complementary and Alternative Medicine on Wikipedia: Opportunities for Improvement
title_full_unstemmed Complementary and Alternative Medicine on Wikipedia: Opportunities for Improvement
title_sort complementary and alternative medicine on wikipedia: opportunities for improvement
publisher Hindawi Limited
series Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
issn 1741-427X
1741-4288
publishDate 2014-01-01
description Wikipedia, a free and collaborative Internet encyclopedia, has become one of the most popular sources of free information on the Internet. However, there have been concerns over the quality of online health information, particularly that on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). This exploratory study aimed to evaluate several page attributes of articles on CAM in the English Wikipedia. A total of 97 articles were analyzed and compared with eight articles of broad categories of therapies in conventional medicine using the Mann-Whitney U test. Based on the Wikipedia editorial assessment grading, 4% of the articles attained “good article” status, 34% required considerable editing, and 56% needed substantial improvements in their content. The median daily access of the articles over the previous 90 days was 372 (range: 7–4,214). The median word count was 1840 with a readability of grade 12.7 (range: 9.4–17.7). Medians of word count and citation density of the CAM articles were significantly lower than those in the articles of conventional medicine therapies. In conclusion, despite its limitations, the general public will continue to access health information on Wikipedia. There are opportunities for health professionals to contribute their knowledge and to improve the accuracy and completeness of the CAM articles on Wikipedia.
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/105186
work_keys_str_mv AT malcolmkoo complementaryandalternativemedicineonwikipediaopportunitiesforimprovement
_version_ 1725373153402683392