academic writing examples (85)

MSc Information Management – Test EssayBriefly describe the ways in which the emergence of the World Wide Web has affected access to information, either from a sociological or technical perspective. Identify and discuss one key issue in depth.One key issue since the emergence of the World Wide Web has been the incredible growth in the number of health-related websites. Cline and Haynes (2001:671) numbered these sites as more than 70,000 with the criteria being websites that contain health information. The remarkable speed in which the World Wide Web has evolved has been the catalyst for an information revolution. And with this growth there has been the obvious benefits of being able to access information on any given topic from anywhere in the world. But the downside of this increase as Jadad and Gagliardi (1998:611) point out is that, “The availability of information could also result in many potentially harmful effects on both consumers and health professionals who do not use it appropriately.”Whilst Cline and Haynes (2001) figure of 70,000 websites will have grown somewhat since then, and as it is interesting to note that a search for the terms “health” and “information” on Google (2005) retrieved in excess of 120 million results. As Sonnenberg (1997:151) points out that, “The scope of health-related applications on the Internet is as broad as medicine itself.” The growth in health-related websites has been so fast and their content so expansive that it is virtuallyimpossible not to be able to find information on any type of illness, regardless of the severity or rareness. This has led to a large proportion of Internet users accessing the World Wide Web as a major reference for their ailments as opposed to traditional methods such as medical reference books and visits to the doctor. Fox and Fallows (2003) highlighted this trend in America when they undertook research on peoples’ Internet searching habits to discover that looking for health information was the third most common use of the Internet following email and product research. The growth in easily accessible information has lead to a shift in power between the patient and practitioner with being it in favour of the patient.Appleby (1999:20) states that, “Patients are now more knowledgeable about their treatment options when they meet with doctors. That’s the good news; the bad news is that the doctors themselves must sort through all the sometimes contradictory, sometimes inaccurate information.”The shift has been the result of readily available information for patients who either believe they are falling ill or have been diagnosed as ill and potentially facing some kind of treatment. This has created a snowball effect and in turn led to patients, many of whom will have limited knowledge of the Internet, using the World Wide Web more often than before to search for information updates about their illness. Jones (2000:29) supports this notion by saying, “Nurses are one of the main providers of health information for patients. Now, however, they need to think of themselves more as guides than providers.” This change in the relationship isnoted by Grandinetti (2000:186) who believes that, “Patients who do take up the trouble to read up on their health expect to participate in the discussion of treatment options and share in the decision-making.” A study carried out by Rose, et al, (2002:234) concluded that, “Most people used the internet as an additional source of information rather than a substitute for visiting a health professional”.With the growth of the traditional forms of media in general and their continual focus on health-related issues, it is obvious that people will use the World Wide Web to follow up information they have picked up from the press and media. The incredible growth in health-related websites is a reflection of the increase in demand for such websites, and this supply and demand scenario is not without its problems and pitfalls. In the case of people’s health these pitfalls can be quite serious due to the lack of coherence between many of these websites. The topics that are covered on medical websites are not only broad but the advice provided within them can from range from being highly factual to purely fictional depending on the expertise and experience available. Much of the information available is not only incorrect but likely to cause the patient to challenge advice given by their doctor. Bernstam et al (2005:14) states that, “Physicians may be unwilling to recommend specific sites because content and web addresses change quickly.”(Tan-Torres Edejer, 2000:798) reinforced this idea by pointing out that, “Trying to get health information is like drinking from a firehose, and you don’t even know what the source of the water is”.The lack of guidance with regards to what is accurate and relevant information for a particular patient is a genuine concern. There are several questions about the quality of information on the Internet but none of it is as important as information given about health issues. Beniegeri and Pluye (2003:382) believe that, “It is impossible to assess the magnitude of this problem because studies on the subject are not consistent with another.” Many patients turn to discussion lists and forums to find people suffering with the same or similar illness, hoping to find answers.McLellan (1998:SII39) points out that, “The internet also serves patients as an emotional outlet during crisis, and as a route of personal and group communication, in ways that may powerfully affect relationships between patients and physicians.”Patients, especially highly-vulnerable ones who access poor or inaccurate health information via the World Wide Web not only run the risk of forgoing appointments with their doctor due to fears raised by what they have read but also could pass on incorrect information to others. Many of the thousands of health discussion lists and forums can in essence become the electronic equivalent of Chinese Whispers, where one patient’s illness eventually becomes diluted into several other forum posts, each time offering poorer quality of information and eventually bad advice. Beniegeri and Pluye (2003:381) point out that there is, “potential for harm from Internet-based information because of the presence ofinaccurate and misleading information.” Beniegeri and Pluye (2003:381) use the example of online support groups by stating that, “Sensational anecdotes and unbalanced views are common.”Another problem faced by the patient as they search for health information is that of understanding the information they have found. Obviously how a patient disseminates information depends on their level of literacy and education. But despite this, even the most proficient and educated of Internet users are still susceptible to accessing websites where they are unable to understand the terminology or websites where the information is so poorly communicated that they may misinterpret it. Beniegeri and Pluye (2003:383) conform to this belief, stating, “The most important barriers to the use of health and medical information on the Internet are the difficulties in finding it and, for a large part of the population, in understanding and using it properly.” The ease in which it takes to set up a website has allowed anyone to publish to the World Wide Web. And this lack of quality control is highlighted by Pereira and Brucra (1998:61) who state, “There are few controls to prevent harmful, unbalanced or scientifically unsupported medical information from being published.”A study by Berland et al (2001) evaluated health information available on the World Wide Web on breast cancer, depression, obesity and childhood asthma by using English and Spanish language search engines and web sites. Theirconclusions were alarming to say the least as they discovered only one link out of five led to a website with relevant information.In addition to this Benigeri and Pluye (2003:381) have also pointed out that there is, “The potential for harm and risks of over-consumption.” Meaning that some patients could become obsessed by their health by always looking for explanations or for other sources of information about their latest ailment, regardless of its severity.The lack of authority on many of these sites can lead to the person becoming misinformed about their condition and can in turn affect how a patient may deal with their own illness. Perez-Lopez (2004:280) states that, “As a group, physicians use the internet more than do many other sectors of the general adult population.” With this in mind surely it would be better for patients to discuss with professionals which medical websites to trust rather than stumble around in the dark.Many health-related websites offer biased information that may be focused on selling a particular product or treatment. These websites use their apparent specialist knowledge as a way of enticing users into their site by not only offering information but also a solution. Pharmaceutical companies have latched onto the idea of working alongside medical information sites by means of using advertisement banners offering their product as the ultimate solution. This solution does not only come at a financial cost for the user but can result in a health cost as they risk seeking the incorrect treatment; in addition to the real possibility of takingthe wrong medication or even the wrong dosage. The other possibility is that by accessing information this way, patients may insist that their doctor prescribes the medication they have seen advertised regardless of its consequences.Perez-Lopez (2004:279) points out that, “The evaluation of the effect of the Internet on health and health care has never been easy, nor is it likely to become so in the near future.” But if medical professionals encourage patients to use this source of information finding correctly the positives will outreach the negatives. Eng, et al (1998:1374) concluded that technology will, “Enhance their ability to negotiate the health care system, understand and modify their health risk behaviours and acquire coping skills and social support.”At best, the possibilities for using the World Wide Web as a health tool are endless. If used correctly, the World Wide Web can help promote healthier living and be a source of good and competent advice on health issues. It can help patients become more knowledgeable about their health and possibly encourage them to visit their doctor sooner rather than later about a certain condition. At its worst, it will breed uncertainty and anxiety amongst many patients who are unsure about the severity of their illness due to poor online advice. It could leave health professionals reassessing what advice they give in addition to spending more time reassuring patients about what they may have read on the Internet.Appleby C. (1999) Net Gain or Net Loss? Health Care Consumers Become Internet Savvy. Trustee, 52(2), 20-23.Benigeri M & Pluye P. (2003) Shortcomings of Health Information on the Internet. Health Promotion International, 18(4), 381-386.Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, et al. (2001) Health Information on the Internet: Accessibility, Quality, and Readability in English and Spanish. JAMA, 285(20), 2612-2621.Bernstam EV, Shelton DM, Walji M & Meric-Bernstam. (2005) Instruments to Access the quality of Health Information on the World Wide Web: What can our Patients Actually Use? International Journal of Medical Informatics, 74(1), 13-19.Cline RJW & Haynes KM. (2001) Consumer Health Information Seeking on the Internet: The State of the Art. Health Education Research, 16(6), 671-692.Eng TR, Maxfield A, Patrick K, et al. (1998) Access to Health Information and Support. A public Highway or a Private Road? JAMA, 280(15), 1371-1375.Fox S & Fallows D. (2003) Internet Health Resources. Pew Internet and American Life Project [Online] Washington. Last accessed 13/10/2005/PPF/r/95/report_display.aspGoogle (2005) [Online]./search?hl=en&q=health+information&btnG=Search&meta = (Last accessed 13/10/05)Grandinetti DA. (2000) Doctors and the Web. Help your Patients Surf the Net Safely. Medical Economics, 5(March 6), 186.Jadad AR & Gagliardi A. (1998) Rating Health Information on the Internet: Navigating to Knowledge or to Babel? JAMA, 279(8) 611-614.Jones R. (2000) Follow the Guide. Nursing Standard, 14(44), 29.McLellan, F. (1998) “Like Hunger, Like Thirst”: Patients, Journals, and the Internet. The Lancet, 352(175), SII39-SII43.Pereira J & Brucra E. (1998) The Internet as a Resource for Palliative Care and Hospice: A Review and Proposals. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management,16(1), 59-68.Perez-Lopez RF. (2004) An Evaluation of the Contents and Quality of Menopause Information on the World Wide Web. Maturitas, 49(4), 276-282.Rose PW, Jenkins L, Fuller A, et al. (2002) Doctors’ and Patients’ use of the Internet for Healthcare: A Study from one General Practice. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 19(4) 233-235.Sonnenberg FA. (1997) Health Information on the Internet: Opportunities and Pitfalls. Archives of Internal Medicine, 157(2), 151-152.Tan-Torres Edejer, T. D. (2000) Disseminating Health Information in Developing Countries: The Role of the Internet. BMJ, 321(7264), 797-800.。