What Do People Want to Know About Cochlear Implants: A Google Analytic Study

Ezer H. Benaim,Samuel P. O'Rourke,Margaret T. Dillon
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.31741
IF: 2.97
2024-08-30
The Laryngoscope
Abstract:This study investigated into the accessibility and quality of online information regarding cochlear implantation and cochlear implant devices through the lens of a Google search engine optimization tool. The study highlights popular topics and examines Google search responses to popular People Also Ask questions, finding that while these resources offer information, they often lack readability and transparency, potentially complicating decision‐making for patients. The findings emphasize the importance of health care professionals in guiding patients effectively and ensuring that online medical information is not only accurate but also easily comprehensible. Objective Identify the questions most frequently asked online about cochlear implants (CI) and assess the readability and quality of the content. Methods A Google search engine observational study was conducted via a search response optimization (SEO) tool. The SEO tool listed the questions generated by Google's "People Also Ask" (PAA) feature for the search queries "cochlear implant" and "cochlear implant surgery." The top 50 PAA questions for each query were conceptually classified. Sourced websites were evaluated for readability, transparency and information quality, and ability to answer the question. Readability and accuracy in answering questions were also compared to the responses from ChatGPT 3.5. Results The PAA questions were commonly related to technical details (21%), surgical factors (18%), and postoperative experiences (12%). Sourced websites mainly were from academic institutions, followed by commercial companies. Among all types of websites, readability, on average, did not meet the recommended standard for health‐related patient education materials. Only two websites were at or below the 8th‐grade level. Responses by ChatGPT had significantly poorer readability compared to the websites (p
medicine, research & experimental,otorhinolaryngology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?