Running head: WEBSITE EVALUATION

Website Evaluation
Sarah Hunt
Dixie State University

WEBSITE EVALUATION

2
Website Evaluation

Staying current and up-to-date with medical illnesses and the various treatment options is
imperative to delivering care and guaranteeing best possible outcomes for patients. Utilizing
various websites assists healthcare professionals with obtaining some of the information they
need to incorporate into their plan of care. In addition to seeking professional help, the general
pubic also turns to electronic resources for information and answers about their health concerns.
However, it can be difficult to sort out false information from the facts. While many websites
may be appealing and appear to be accurate, they do not always display the correct information. I
chose to evaluate WebMD because over the years I have lost my faith in this website. I believe it
has come to be vague and has contradicted what I have learned and researched. I hope to gain
more insight during this evaluation to assess if WebMD is an asset or not.
Criterion
The purpose of this paper is to explore the relevance of the WebMD website and follow the other
criteria of credibility, appearance, currency, evidence of objectivity, and financial costs. I chose
these six areas of criteria because as a whole, I believe incorporating the best from these aspects
will create a website that draws in both the general population and medical staff.
Relevance
In a world where technology is rapidly improving and treatment options are widening, it
is important to have all of the new and current research information. As the years go on, bacteria
and diseases appear to be getting smarter in their response to the body. They develop immunities
and tolerances to medications, multiply at alarming rates, and possess other detrimental effects.
Combining technological advances to combat developing diseases will assist with appropriate
care. Many people turn to their Internet searches in hopes of gaining some peace of mind in

WEBSITE EVALUATION

regards to their health concerns. Websites like WebMD must ensure they are accurate and
provide correct and current information for their users.
Credibility
According to UC Berkley, for credibility, it is important to consider who is the writer of
the website, what are their credentials, and when was it last updated (Evaluating web pages).
The WebMD Health Senior Staff and Editorial Team are majorly composed of medical directors.
For a website addressing health concerns, it is important to have medical personnel to weigh in
on particular subjects. Directly below their staff introductions, the website states Last updated
February 20, 2014 (Who we are). Knowing the date of the last update implies the website is
still being managed, staying current, and has not been deserted. Additionally, WebMD is not a
personal page with one writers opinion. It is composed of several doctors and is based on facts
and current research. This contributes to the credibility of the website. WebMD also notes their
mistakes. They have a policy to correct their mistakes if deemed necessary and provide links to
the corrected information. They take the appropriate steps to ensure appropriate credibility.
Appearance
The appearance and ease of usability is moderately easy. I noticed areas of drawback
other aspects that contribute to ease of use. Upon first glance, WebMDs home page is quite long.
It requires the users to scroll through a lot of information- of which appeared to be somewhat
redundant. This can be overwhelming. Additionally, the option to search from an alphabetical list
is near the bottom; a feature that could prove to be helpful when not buried at the bottom of an
information overflow fountain.
Contrarily, there are several links to provide direct information, newsletters,
conversations, top stories, and more. Another unique feature is a symptom checker and body

WEBSITE EVALUATION

mass index calculator. While they specifically state they do not diagnose, the symptom checker
provides users with more specific information about their health concerns.
Currency
WebMD takes pride in providing timely information. They indicate on several areas
throughout their website that they have current information. They even have a specific policy
stating their mission is to provide objective, trustworthy, and timely health information
(About WebMD). Again, their update is in the same year, but it is difficult to say it has been
updated as new information has come out in the year 2014. Another positive note is their links.
They do not have dead links on their website- which means the URLs do link to the appropriate
content instead of a dead page.
Objectivity
WebMD is a .com domain. This means it is not a government published website,
educational, or non-profit. This leads users to questions the objectivity of the website. Is there a
bias? WebMD is a sponsored website. They distinguish their material from their sponsors; they
indicate this with promoted by, sponsored by, and so forth. They also display advertisements
related to health on their website. With that said, it does not appear WebMD is a biased website.
They report on facts of health and research.
Financial Costs
WebMD is free for public use. They allow users to register for a subscription to access
community forums, tools, magazines, and newsletters and this is all free of charge. They are able
to provide this services with the website costs being covered by their sponsors and allowing
some related adds on their website. Their advertisement policy and sponsorship can be found on
their website.

WEBSITE EVALUATION

5
Conclusion

With thousands of websites and several search engines, it can be frustrating to discover
which site has accurate information. I went into this evaluation with the intent to discover why
this website is wrong. After evaluation this website I have learned there is more accurate
information than I believed. I appreciate that they have a policy to correct information if it is in
fact incorrect. I also appreciate that the website is frequently updated. I do not like that it is a
sponsored website paid by ads. But I do like that it is geared toward the general public. It assists
with patient education. In conclusion, in the future, I will be more open to the idea of using
WebMD as a health resource.

WEBSITE EVALUATION

6
References

About WebMD. (2014). Retrieved October 28, 2014, from http://www.webmd.com/about

webmd-policies/default.htm?ss=ftr.
Cornell University. (2014). Five criteria for evaluating websites. Retrieved October 29, 2014,
from https://olinuris.library.cornell.edu/ref/research/webcrit.html.
Our Sponsors. (2014). Retrieved October 29, 2014, from http://www.webmd.com/about-webmd
policies/about-our-sponsors.
U C Berkely. (2012). Evaluating Web Pages: Techniques to Apply & Questions to Ask.
Retrieved October 25, 2014 from http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Intern
et/Evaluate.html.
WebMDs Corrections Policy. (2014). Retireved October 29, 2014 from
http://www.webmd.com/about-webmd-policies/webmd-corrections-policies.