What is good quality information and how to assess and assure it

There is a huge amount of information available on a wide range of issues relating to people affected by neurological conditions. It can be very confusing for both service users and health professionals to sort out what information they should trust and use from all that can be available.

In many ways what defines “good” information will be subjective. For some people information that provides a lot of detail with research references would be good information and appropriate to their needs, for others “good” information would be that which gives them clear simple messages about how to manage their condition and when to seek help. Some information materials focus more on telling people what health professionals have decided patients should know and others are focused more on addressing the concerns that people affected by neurological conditions have. Ideally a balance will be struck between these two perspectives, but the assessment of where the right balance is will vary depending on who is doing the assessment.

When thinking about the quality of information it is important to assess three areas:

Accessibility

  • Can your audience access your information?
  • Is it delivered in the right medium and in the right format? If it's web-based information does it use standardised data formatting, metadata and the appropriate coding methods? Also, don't forget the specific requirements of your audience (e.g. language, disabilities – see more detailed guidance in Section Three).

Usability

  • Is your information designed and structured in such a way that the user can get what they want from it?
  • Is it produced in a clear and consistent format?
  • Does your web site make it easy to browse and search to find answers?
  • Is your site engaging and user-friendly?

Reliability

  • Is your information based on the best available evidence that exists?
  • How did you search for, critically appraise, synthesize and summarise this evidence to produce your information?
  • Is the information presented in a balanced, unbiased way, mentioning all treatment options, benefits and risks?
  • Did you consult experts and how many reviewed the text?

A number of tools exist for assessing the accessibility, usability and reliability of information. These have been gathered together on the PiF website where there are also top tips and background references about evaluating information 

The Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) have produced guidelines on making information accessible, particularly for people with a sight problem.

Mencap have produced guidelines on accessible writing, designed for communicating with people who have learning difficulties, but very useful for a general audience too.

The Department of Health has stated an intention to develop an Information Accreditation Scheme (Better Information, Better Choices, Better Health, Department of Health, December 2004). It is anticipated that this would be up and running by 2008. NHS and social care professionals would then be able to identify whether information materials had been developed by organisations accredited by the Scheme. 

The Patient Information Bank (PIB) being developed for the Department of Health is a “bank” of quality assured, evidence-based health information leaflets and fact sheets which NHS staff can print off and give to patients. Some of this information is translated into 12 other languages. There is currently, however, very little in the Patient Information Bank covering neurological conditions.