# A Cross‐Sectional Study of the Quality of Online Information on Periodontal Surgery

## TL;DR

This study evaluates the quality and readability of online information about periodontal surgery, finding it often lacking in accuracy and clarity.

## Contribution

The study provides a comprehensive assessment of online periodontal surgery information using multiple validated tools and readability metrics.

## Key findings

- The mean DISCERN score for websites was 2.89, indicating moderate quality.
- Healthcare portals scored highest in PEMAT and JAMA benchmarks.
- The average SMOG score was 9.56, suggesting content is challenging for many readers.

## Abstract

To investigate the quality of online information provided by dental‐related websites regarding periodontal surgery.

The term “Gum Surgery” was entered into three search engines (Google, Yahoo, and Bing). The content of websites satisfying selection criteria was assessed with five validated quality of information tools (DISCERN, The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool [PEMAT], Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA] benchmarks, and HONCode and @TRUST certification). The Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) was used to evaluate the readability of content.

A total of 55 websites satisfied selection criteria. The mean (SD) DISCERN score for all website categories was 2.89 (0.57). The quality of information related to the risks of each treatment scored poorly in most websites. The healthcare portals obtained the highest mean PEMAT score of 71.74%, a statistically significant outcome. Healthcare portal websites also recorded the highest mean (SD) JAMA score of 3.72 (0.75) out of 4. The mean (SD) SMOG score was 9.56 (1.07). Cohen's κ inter‐rater reliability for DISCERN and PEMAT scores were 0.75 and 0.79, respectively.

The information available online about periodontal surgery was variable and difficult to read, falling short of established standards for accuracy, reliability, and credibility. Vital information was often omitted.