Appropriateness of online education material for leukocoria
Reviewed by Fiona Rowe

The purpose of this study was to assess the quality, reliability and readability of online patient education materials on leukocoria. A Google search was undertaken for leukocoria and white pupil. They identified and assessed the first 50 sources for both terms (total 100). The DISCERN tool, HON-code criteria and JAMA benchmark criteria were used to assess the quality and reliability of sources. The online read calculator was used to assess readability along with the Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade level, Simple measure of gobbledygook index, Automated readability index, Linsear write, Gunning fog index and Coleman-Lian index. Of 100 search results, 51 were eligible for analysis: 25 institutional and 26 private sources, 26 derived from leukocoria and 25 from white pupil. Raters had good inter-rater reliability (>0.8 alpha coefficient) on DISCERN. Median quality of sources scored 4 on DISCERN (range 2–5). There was no difference for source or term. Median HON-code score was 10 (range 3–16). Institution sites generally outperformed private. JAMA median score was 3 (range 1–4) with both sites performing well. Readability was difficult with average reading grade level of 11.3 ±3.7. This may exclude those with lower health literacy. The authors conclude existent online material has moderate to high level of quality and reliability. Readability is above the average American reading ability. Further improvements are needed in this regard along with information in other languages and from other countries.

Quality, reliability, readability and accountability of online information on leukocoria.
Eleiwa TK, Dihan QA, Brown AD, et al.
JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC OPHTHALMOLOGY AND STRABISMUS
2024;61(5):332–8.