LAUSR

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to determine the quality, reliability and usability of information on the Internet regarding hypodontia. METHOD A survey of patients with hypodontia revealed seven key search terms favoured by patients: Hypodontia; Congenitally missing teeth; Missing teeth; Gaps in teeth; Cure of missing teeth; Information on missing teeth; and Treatment of missing teeth. These were entered into four search engines: Google; Ask; Wikipedia; and NHS Choices. Relevant websites were assessed for their overall demographics, author type, country of origin and rank within the search engine. They were then analysed using five validated assessment tools. Intra-examiner reliability was assessed, and statistical analysis of the data was undertaken. RESULTS Good intra-examiner reliability was observed. A total of 48 websites were included for analysis from an initial 1718. There was no relationship between the ranking of a website on a search engine and the quality of information it contained. When medical search terminology was used, it resulted in websites of better quality than layperson search terms. Most websites were produced by general dental or specialist dental practices but the quality of these was poorer than those developed by private companies and medical organisations. The country of origin was primarily the USA and UK; however, this had no relationship to website quality. Overall, the majority of websites scored poorly for the validated tools and none scored well across multiple tools. A statistical analysis showed a positive relationship between the LIDA and DISCERN instruments but no other correlation between other validated tools was found. CONCLUSION The quality and reliability of information on the Internet regarding hypodontia is generally poor. There is a need for a reliable online hypodontia resource that can be recommended for patient use.