Evaluating websites checklist

\r\n

\r\n

Source:

\r\n

Authors/sponsoring body/organisation

\r\n

\r\n

\r\n

Not the be all and end all – for instance just because something is reputable it still may not be right, but a good place to start.

\r\n

\r\n

\r\n

Appropriate for your purpose:

\r\n

What do you need this for?

\r\n

\r\n
Applies to your setting – eg location, population,
\r\n
\r\n
Level: who is the information intended for? Specialist or lay audience.
\r\n

\r\n

\r\n

Bias / Objectivity:

\r\n

Context of the information.

\r\n

\r\n
Opinions. Do the authors clearly state their standpoint?
\r\n
\r\n
Language: emotional or vague? Look for omissions. Clearly organised?
\r\n
\r\n
How much knowledge do they show they have of the relevant schools of thought, techniques, or theories. If they are presenting a new theory do they discuss its limitations or problems?
\r\n
\r\n
Use of evidence base. Can you verify the facts elsewhere?
\r\n

\r\n

\r\n

Currency:

\r\n

\r\n

Where do I start to look for medical information?