Cited by 57Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityPharmaceutical industry and healthcareSocial Media in Health Education

Can Online Consumers Contribute to Drug Knowledge? A Mixed-Methods Comparison of Consumer-Generated and Professionally Controlled Psychotropic Medication Information on the Internet

Open access
Hughes, Shannon, Cohen, David·2011·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Ongoing initiatives to filter online health searches exclude consumer-generated content from search returns, though its inferiority compared with professionally controlled content is not demonstrated. The antidepressant escitalopram and the antipsychotic quetiapine have ranked over the last 5 years as top-selling agents in their respective drug classes. Both drugs have various off-label mental health and non-mental health uses, ranging from the relief of insomnia and migraines to the treatment of severe developmental disorders. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to describe the most frequently reported effects of escitalopram and quetiapine in online consumer reviews, to compare them with effects described in professionally controlled commercial health websites, and to gauge the usability of online consumer medication reviews. METHODS: A stratified simple random sample of 960 consumer reviews was selected from all 6998 consumer reviews of the two drugs in 2 consumer-generated (www.askapatient.com and www.crazymeds.us) and 2 professionally controlled (www.webmd.com and www.revolutionhealth.com) health websites. Professional medication descriptions included all standard information on the medications from the latter 2 websites. All textual data were inductively coded for medication effects, and intercoder agreement was assessed. Chi-square was used to test for associations between consumer-reported effects and website origination. RESULTS: Consumers taking either escitalopram (n = 480) or quetiapine (n = 480) most frequently reported symptom improvement (30.4% or 146/480, 24.8% or 119/480) or symptom worsening (15.8% or 76/480, 10.2% or 49/480), changes in sleep (36% or 173/480, 60.6% or 291/480) and changes in weight and appetite (22.5% or 108/480, 30.8% or 148/480). More consumers posting reviews on consumer-generated rather than professionally controlled websites reported symptom worsening on quetiapine (17.3% or 38/220 versus 5% or 11/220, P < .001), while more consumers posting on professionally controlled websites reported symptom improvement (32.7% or 72/220 versus 21.4% or 47/220, P = .008). Professional descriptions more frequently listed physical adverse effects and warnings about suicidal ideation while consumer reviews emphasized effects disrupting daily routines and provided richer descriptions of effects in context. The most recent 20 consumer reviews on each drug from each website (n = 80) were comparable to the full sample of reviews in the frequency of commonly reported effects. CONCLUSION: Consumer reviews and professional medication descriptions generally reported similar effects of two psychotropic medications but differed in their descriptions and in frequency of reporting. Professional medication descriptions offer the advantage of a concise yet comprehensive listing of drug effects, while consumer reviews offer greater context and situational examples of how effects may manifest in various combinations and to varying degrees. The dispersion of consumer reviews across websites limits their integration, but a brief browsing strategy on the two target medications nonetheless retrieved representative consumer content. Current strategies for filtering online health searches to return only trusted or approved websites may inappropriately address the challenge to identify quality health sources on the Internet because such strategies unduly limit access to an entire complementary source for health information.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/jmir.1716

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Other research suggests that internet data can provide reliable accounts of users' experiences of drug-induced adverse effects that are consistent with academic and professional literature.

    “However, other research suggests that internet data can be used to provide reliable accounts of users' experiences of drug-induced adverse effects that are consistent with academic and professional literature [15].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hughes, S., & Cohen, D.
Affiliations
  • Utah State University (US)
  • Florida International University (US)
Corresponding author
Hughes, Shannon
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2011-07-29
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
e53
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1991429610
Cited by
57
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 3
FWCI
8.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Florida International University Digital Commons (Florida International University) (submittedVersion)
  • Florida International University Digital Commons (Florida International University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Florida International University
  • Fahs-Beck Fund for Research and Experimentation
  • National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
Keywords
user-generated content, escitalopram, quetiapine, psychotropic drugs, off-label drug use, symptom worsening, sleep changes, antidepressants, antipsychotic drugs
MeSH terms
Quetiapine Fumarate, Antidepressive Agents, Community Participation, Dibenzothiazepines, Drug Information Services, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Citalopram, Patient Satisfaction, Internet, Consumer Health Information

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review