Readability and credibility evaluation of most-visited health websites based on eBizMBA and Alexa global ranking

Shahabedin Rahmatizadeh, Saeideh Valizadeh-Haghi, Hamed Nasibi-Sis, Hossein Motahari-Nezhad



Introduction: Online health information is one of the most important and widely used sources of information. Currently, a significant number of individuals use the internet for health-related information to learn about health, disease, health promotion, and threats to their health.

Material and Methods: This research examined the top 15 health websites based on their popularity in eBizMBA and Alexa rank from January to February 2022. A total of 30 health websites (15 from each category) were evaluated in terms of credibility by the use of Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and health on the net foundation (HON) code. Also, the readability of the mentioned websites was evaluated by the use of four readability tools.

Results: Most of the websites ranked by both Alexa and eBizMBA met the “Authority” and” Complementarity" criteria. When it comes to the readability of the 30 most visited health websites according to eBizMBA and Alexa analytics in the world, the analysis demonstrated that the readability of highly-ranked health websites was higher than the recommended level.

Conclusion: Some of the websites had deficiencies according to the HONcode and JAMA criteria, and the average readability of the websites did not meet the gold standard. Despite the increasing use of the internet for medical information, these resources' poor quality and readability remain a barrier to informed decision-making of patients.


Patient Portals; Comprehension; Public Health Informatics; JAMA; HON; Alexa; eBizMBA; Website Evaluation; Readability;


Internet World Stats. Internet world stats: Usage and population statistics [Internet]. 2019 [cited: 15 Aug 2023]. Availale from:

Ozkisi H, Topaloglu M. The university students’ knowledge of Internet applications and usage habits. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015; 182: 584–9.

Findahl O. Swedes and the Internet. The Internet Infrastructure Foundation; 2014.

Leung L. Internet embeddedness: Links with online health information seeking, expectancy value/quality of health information websites, and internet usage patterns. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2008; 11(5): 565-9. PMID: 18771393 DOI: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0189

Ta-Min R. Comprehension of online cancer information: A propositional assessment of readability, inferences, and coherence [MSc Thesis]. University of Waterloo; 2006.

McMullan M. Patients using the Internet to obtain health information: How this affects the patient–health professional relationship. Patient Educ Couns. 2006; 63(1-2): 24-8. PMID: 16406474 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2005.10.006

Xiao N, Sharman R, Rao HR, Upadhyaya S. Factors influencing online health information search: An empirical analysis of a national cancer-related survey. Decision Support Systems. 2014; 57: 417–27.

Lambert SD, Loiselle CG. Health information-seeking behavior. Qual Health Res. 2007; 17(8): 1006-19. PMID: 17928475 DOI: 10.1177/1049732307305199

Ratzan SC, Parker RM, Selden CR, Zorn M. National library of medicine current bibliographies in medicine: Health literacy. National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2000.

Fiske A, Buyx A, Prainsack B. Health information counselors: A new profession for the age of big data. Acad Med. 2019; 94(1): 37-41. PMID: 30095453 DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002395

Gottlieb LM, Alderwick H. Integrating social and medical care: could it worsen health and increase inequity? Ann Fam Med. 2019; 17(1): 77-81. PMID: 30670400 DOI: 10.1370/afm.2339

Buhrman M, Gordh T, Andersson G. Internet interventions for chronic pain including headache: A systematic review. Internet Interv. 2016; 4: 17-34. PMID: 30135787 DOI: 10.1016/j.invent.2015.12.001

Lin CA, Atkin DJ, Cappotto C, Davis C, Dean J, Eisenbaum J, et al. Ethnicity, digital divides and uses of the Internet for health information. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015; 51: 216–23.

Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa E-R. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: A systematic review. JAMA. 2002; 287(20): 2691-700. PMID: 12020305 DOI: 10.1001/jama.287.20.2691

Ostry A, Young ML, Hughes M. The quality of nutritional information available on popular websites: A content analysis. Health Educ Res. 2008; 23(4): 648-55. PMID: 17897928 DOI: 10.1093/her/cym050

Alamoudi U, Hong P. Readability and quality assessment of websites related to microtia and aural atresia. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2015; 79(2): 151-6. PMID: 25554575 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2014.11.027

Aydın GÖ, Kaya N, Turan N. The role of health literacy in access to online health information. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015; 195: 1683–7.

Valizadeh-Haghi S, Rahmatizadeh S. eHealth literacy and general interest in using online Health information: A survey among patients with dental diseases. Online J Public Health Inform. 2018; 10(3): e219. PMID: 30680052 DOI: 10.5210/ojphi.v10i3.9487

Soleimaninejad A, Valizadeh-Haghi S, Rahmatizadeh S. Assessing the eHealth literacy skills of family caregivers of medically ill elderly. Online J Public Health Inform. 2019; 11(2): e12. PMID: 31632606 DOI: 10.5210/ojphi.v11i2.10149

Yi GS, Hu A. Quality and readability of online information on in-office vocal fold injections. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2020; 129(3): 294-300. PMID: 31701778 DOI: 10.1177/0003489419887406

Cronin VS. An evaluation of the readability of colon cancer websites [PhD Thesis]. Columbia University; 2007.

Rahmatizadeh S, Valizadeh-Haghi S. The readability of online health information on the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus disease. Journal of Cellular and Molecular Anesthesia. 2021; 6: 154–63.

Lorenzo-Pouso A-I, Pérez-Sayáns M, Kujan O, Castelo-Baz P, Chamorro-Petronacci C, García-García A, et al. Patient-centered web-based information on oral lichen planus: Quality and readability. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2019 Jul; 24(4): e461–7. PMID: 31246939 DOI: 10.4317/medoral.22992

Murray KE, Murray TE, O’Rourke AC, Low C, Veale DJ. Readability and quality of online information on osteoarthritis: An objective analysis with historic comparison. J Med Internet Res. 2019; 8(3): e12855. PMID: 31538953 DOI: 10.2196/12855

Valizadeh-Haghi S, Rahmatizadeh S, Adibi S, Kalantari A. The readability and credibility analysis of online education materials for kidney transplantation. Frontiers in Health Informatics. 2023; 12: 147.

Bodie GD, Dutta MJ. Understanding health literacy for strategic health marketing: eHealth literacy, health disparities, and the digital divide. Health Mark Q. 2008; 25(1-2): 175-203. PMID: 18935884 DOI: 10.1080/07359680802126301

Kirsch IS. Adult literacy in America: A first look at the results of the national adult literacy survey. U.S. Department of Education; 1993.

Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, Algazy JI, Kravitz RL, Broder MS, et al. Health information on the internet: Accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA. 2001; 285(20): 2612-21. PMID: 11368735 DOI: 10.1001/jama.285.20.2612

Tulbert BH, Snyder CW, Brodell RT. Readability of patient-oriented online dermatology resources. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2011; 4(3): 27-33. PMID: 21464884 PMCID: PMC3070466

Baker GC, Newton DE, Bergstresser PR. Increased readability improves the comprehension of written information for patients with skin disease. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1988; 19(6): 1135-41. PMID: 3204187 DOI: 10.1016/s0190-9622(88)70280-7

Berkman ND, Donahue KE, Sheridan SL, Donahue KE, Halpern DJ, Crotty K. Low health literacy and health outcomes: An updated systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2011; 155(2): 97-107. PMID: 21768583 DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-2-201107190-00005

N/A. Health literacy: Report of the Council on Scientific Affairs. Ad Hoc Committee on Health Literacy for the Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association. JAMA. 1999; 281(6): 552-7.

N/A. Federal plain language guidelines [Internet]. 2011 [cited: 28 Agu 2023]. Available from:

National Network of Library of Medicine. An introduction to health literacy [Internet]. 2019 [cited: 19 Nov 2023]. Available from:

Nicosia D. Why is readability so important? [Internet]. 2016 [cited: 18 Sep 2023]. Available from:

Alexa. Alexa Internet: About us.; 2018.

eBizMBA Company information [Internet]. 2016 [cited: 21 Aug 2023]. Available from:

eBizMBA the eBusiness guide [Internet]. 2016 [cited: 21 Aug 2023]. Available from:

How are Alexa’s traffic rankings determined? [Internet]. 2004 [cited: 13 Mar 2022]. Available from:

Olkun HK, Demirkaya AA. Evaluation of Internet information about lingual orthodontics using DISCERN and JAMA tools. Turk J Orthod. 2018; 31(2): 50-4. PMID: 30112514 DOI: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2018.17042

Shanahan D, Ashworth-Holland J, Staines K. Orofacial granulomatosis and dietary interventions: Health information on the Internet. Health and Technology. 2019; 9: 751–6.

Top 15 best health websites [Internet]. 2023 [cited: 10 Dec 2023]. Available from:

The top 500 sites on the web [Internet]. 2016 [cited: 1 Dec 2023]. Available from:

Boyer C, Selby M, Scherrer JR, Appel RD. The health on the net code of conduct for medical and health websites. Comput Biol Med. 1998; 28(5): 603-10. PMID: 9861515 DOI: 10.1016/s0010-4825(98)00037-7

Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet quality. JAMA. 1997; 277(15): 1244-5. PMID: 9103351

HON code [Internet]. 2014 [cited: 3 Apr 2023]. Available from:

Valizadeh-Haghi S, Khazaal Y, Rahmatizadeh S. Health websites on COVID-19: Are they readable and credible enough to help public self-care? J Med Libr Assoc. 2021; 109(1): 75-83. PMID: 33424467 DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2021.1020

Rahmatizadeh S, Valizadeh-Haghi S, Kalavani A, Fakhimi N. Middle East respiratory syndrome on health information websites: How much credible they are? Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). 2019; 2885: 1-16.

Ansari M, Hamzehei R, Valizadeh-Haghi S. Persian language health websites on Ebola disease: Less credible than you think? J Egypt Public Health Assoc. 2020; 95(1): 2. PMID: 32813057 DOI: 10.1186/s42506-019-0027-4

Valizadeh-Haghi S, Rahmatizadeh S. Evaluation of the quality and accessibility of available websites on kidney transplantation. Urol J. 2018; 15(5): 261-5. PMID: 30058062 DOI: 10.22037/uj.v0i0.4252

Guo WJ, Wang WK, Xu D, Qiao Z, Shi YL, Luo P. Evaluating the quality, content, and readability of online resources for failed back spinal surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019; 44(7): 494-502. PMID: 30234809 DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002870

Chumber S, Huber J, Ghezzi P. A methodology to analyze the quality of health information on the interne: The example of diabetic neuropathy. Diabetes Educ. 2015; 41(1): 95-105. PMID: 25480397 DOI: 10.1177/0145721714560772

Jo JH, Kim JR, Kim MJ, Chung JW, Park JW. Quality and readability of online information on dental treatment for snoring and obstructive sleep apnea. Int J Med Inform. 2020; 133: 104000. PMID: 31731221 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104000

Rayess H, Zuliani GF, Gupta A, Svider PF, Folbe AJ, Eloy JA, et al. Critical analysis of the quality, readability, and technical aspects of online information provided for neck-lifts. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2017; 19(2): 115-20. PMID: 27812680 DOI: 10.1001/jamafacial.2016.1219

Varela-Centelles P, Ledesma-Ludi Y, Seoane-Romero JM, Seoane J. Information about oral cancer on the Internet: our patients cannot understand it. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015; 53(4): 393-5. PMID: 25703184 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2015.01.020

Hadden K, Prince LY, Schnaekel A, Couch CG, Stephenson JM, Wyrick TO. Readability of patient education materials in hand surgery and health literacy best practices for improvement. J Hand Surg Am. 2016; 41(8): 825-32. PMID: 27291416 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2016.05.006

Royal KD, Erdmann KM. Evaluating the readability levels of medical infographic materials for public consumption. J Vis Commun Med. 2018; 41(3): 99-102. PMID: 29987964 DOI: 10.1080/17453054.2018.1476059

Brigo F, Otte WM, Igwe SC, Tezzon F, Nardone R. Clearly written, easily comprehended? The readability of websites providing information on epilepsy. Epilepsy Behav. 2015; 44: 35-9. PMID: 25601720 DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2014.12.029

Grewal P, Alagaratnam S. The quality and readability of colorectal cancer information on the Internet. Int J Surg. 2013; 11(5): 410-3. PMID: 23523948 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2013.03.006

Chi E, Jabbour N, Aaronson NL. Quality and readability of websites for patient information on tonsillectomy and sleep apnea. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2017; 98: 1-3. PMID: 28583484 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2017.04.031

The SMOG readability formula, a simple measure of gobbledygook [Internet]. 1969 [cited: 17 Nov 2019]. Available from:

Wally MK, Bemenderfer T, McKnight RR, Gorbaty JD, Jeray K, Seymour RB, et al. Quality and content of Internet-based information for osteoporosis and fragility fracture diagnoses. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2021; 5(2): e00192. PMID: 33591128 DOI: 10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-20-00192

Qadeer MA, Kelly M, Lenehan B. Readability and quality assessment of Internet-based patient education materials related to deep vein thrombosis. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 2022; 33(1): 8-13. PMID: 34799504 DOI: 10.1097/MBC.0000000000001051

Corfield JM, Abouassaly R, Lawrentschuk N. Health information quality on the Internet for bladder cancer and urinary diversion: A multi-lingual analysis. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2018; 70(2): 137-43. PMID: 28707843 DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.17.02952-6

Sheridan GA, O’Brien C, Masri BA, Duncan CP, Garbuz DS. Revision total hip arthroplasty: An analysis of the quality and readability of information on the internet. World J Orthop. 2020; 11(2): 82-9. PMID: 32190552 DOI: 10.5312/wjo.v11.i2.82

Jo JH, Kim JR, Kim MJ, Chung JW, Park JW. Quality and readability of online information on dental treatment for snoring and obstructive sleep apnea. Int J Med Inform. 2020; 133: 104000. PMID: 31731221 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104000

Hamzehei R, Ansari M, Rahmatizadeh S, Valizadeh-Haghi S. Websites as a tool for public health education: Determining the trustworthiness of health websites on Ebola disease. Online J Public Health Inform. 2018; 10(3): e221. PMID: 30680054 DOI: 10.5210/ojphi.v10i3.9544

Valizadeh-Haghi S, Rahmatizadeh S, Soleimaninejad A, Mousavi Shirazi SF, Mollaei P. Are health websites credible enough for elderly self-education in the most prevalent elderly diseases? BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021; 21(1): 31. PMID: 33509183 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-021-01397-x

Zhang D, Zhan W, Zheng C, Zhang J, Huang A, Hu S, et al. Online health information-seeking behaviors and skills of Chinese college students. BMC Public Health. 2021; 21(1): 736. PMID: 33858389 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-10801-0

Doubleday AR, Novin S, Long KL, Schneider DF, Sippel RS, Pitt SC. Online information for treatment for low-risk thyroid cancer: Assessment of timeliness, content, quality, and readability. J Cancer Educ. 2021; 36(4): 850-7. PMID: 32108292 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-020-01713-5

Meade MJ, Dreyer CW. An assessment of the treatment information contained within the websites of direct-to-consumer orthodontic aligner providers. Aust Dent J. 2021; 66(1): 77-84. PMID: 33237579 DOI: 10.1111/adj.12810

Meade MJ, Dreyer CW. Web-based information on orthodontic clear aligners: A qualitative and readability assessment. Aust Dent J. 2020; 65(3): 225-32. PMID: 32358804 DOI: 10.1111/adj.12776

Aaronson NL, Castaño JE, Simons JP, Jabbour N. Quality, readability, and trends for websites on Ankyloglossia. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2018; 127(7): 439-44. PMID: 29774762 DOI: 10.1177/0003489418776343

Killip SC, Kwong NKR, Macdermid JC, Fletcher AJ, Carleton NR. The quality, readability, completeness, and accuracy of ptsd websites for firefighters. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020; 17(20): 7629. PMID: 33086772 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17207629

Saleh J, Gornitsky J, Jaloux C, Bougie E. Readability and quality assessment of online materials for syndactyly release. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2022; 10(1): e4050. PMID: 35083104 DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000004050

Meade MJ, Dreyer CW. The quality and readability of online molar incisor hypomineralisation patient education materials: A systematic analysis. Aust Dent J. 2022; 67(2): 159-67. PMID: 35075657 DOI: 10.1111/adj.12899



  • There are currently no refbacks.