@Article{信息:doi 10.2196 / / jmir。1886年，作者=“Rhebergen, Martijn DF和Lenderink, Annet F和van Dijk, Frank JH和Hulshof, Carel TJ”，标题=“使用在线专家健康网络与普通信息源回答健康问题的比较”，期刊=“J医学互联网研究”，年=“2012”，月=“2月”，日=“02”，卷=“14”，数=“1”，页=“e9”，关键词=“信息服务;在线专家网络;医学信息学;信息寻求行为;职业卫生;循证实践;背景:许多工人对职业安全与健康(OSH)有疑问。目前尚不清楚，当员工使用常见的信息来源(如网站)时，他们是否能够找到正确的、基于证据的职业安全和健康问题的答案，或者他们是否会从使用易于访问的、免费的职业安全和健康专家提供建议的在线网络中受益。目的:评估使用职业安全和健康专家在线网络的一组工人(干预组)与使用普通信息源的一组工人(对照组)对职业安全和健康问题的正确率和循证答案。 Methods: In a quasi-experimental study, workers in the intervention and control groups were randomly offered 2 questions from a pool of 16 standardized OSH questions. Both questions were sent by mail to all participants, who had 3 weeks to answer them. The intervention group was instructed to use only the online network ArboAntwoord, a network of about 80 OSH experts, to solve the questions. The control group was instructed that they could use all information sources available to them. To assess answer correctness as the main study outcome, 16 standardized correct model answers were constructed with the help of reviewers who performed literature searches. Subsequently, the answers provided by all participants in the intervention (n = 94 answers) and control groups (n = 124 answers) were blinded and compared with the correct model answers on the degree of correctness. Results: Of the 94 answers given by participants in the intervention group, 58 were correct (62{\%}), compared with 24 of the 124 answers (19{\%}) in the control group, who mainly used informational websites found via Google. The difference between the 2 groups was significant (rate difference = 43{\%}, 95{\%} confidence interval [CI] 30{\%}--54{\%}). Additional analysis showed that the rate of correct main conclusions of the answers was 85 of 94 answers (90{\%}) in the intervention group and 75 of 124 answers (61{\%}) in the control group (rate difference = 29{\%}, 95{\%} CI 19{\%}--40{\%}). Remarkably, we could not identify differences between workers who provided correct answers and workers who did not on how they experienced the credibility, completeness, and applicability of the information found (P > .05). Conclusions: Workers are often unable to find correct answers to OSH questions when using common information sources, generally informational websites. Because workers frequently misjudge the quality of the information they find, other strategies are required to assist workers in finding correct answers. Expert advice provided through an online expert network can be effective for this purpose. As many people experience difficulties in finding correct answers to their health questions, expert networks may be an attractive new source of information for health fields in general. ", issn="1438-8871", doi="10.2196/jmir.1886", url="//www.mybigtv.com/2012/1/e9/", url="https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1886", url="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22356848" }