Two clinicians independently analysed the quality and content of educational websites (patient.co.uk and wikipedia.org) for common and uncommon diagnoses, with cancerresearchuk.org also used to assess two head and neck cancers.


 Cancerresearchuk.org, followed by patient.co.uk, scored most highly in their ability to inform readers on a selection of otolaryngological conditions.  Where possible, patients should be advised to access professionally maintained health information websites (patient.co.uk and cancerresearchuk.org). 
patient.co.uk
Two clinicians independently analysed the quality and content of educational websites (patient.co.uk and wikipedia.org) for common and uncommon diagnoses, with cancerresearchuk.org also used to assess two head and neck cancers.


 Cancerresearchuk.org, followed by patient.co.uk, scored most highly in their ability to inform readers on a selection of otolaryngological conditions.  Where possible, patients should be advised to access professionally maintained health information websites (patient.co.uk and cancerresearchuk.org). 
cancerresearchuk.org
Two clinicians independently analysed the quality and content of educational websites (patient.co.uk and wikipedia.org) for common and uncommon diagnoses, with cancerresearchuk.org also used to assess two head and neck cancers.


 Although wikipedia.org was less likely to include all relevant information and was more difficult to read, it still provided mostly accurate information.


 However, wikipedia.org can provide adequate information, although it lacks depth and can be difficult to understand.
wikipedia.org