Criteria
Guidelines and Indicators
References

Criteria

These are the minimum requirements for an external link. A web site must meet these criteria for selection:

1. The web site provides intellectual content and/or a directory that nurses can use in their practice.
2. The web site is in English or has English translations of all its pages.
3. The sponsor or producer of the web site is clearly identified and legitimate (provides more than an e-mail address).
4. There is no cost or fee to view the intellectual content on the web site.
5. The web site can be viewed and navigated using software and hardware that is readily available via the UIHC network system.
6. The web site does not require user registration.
7. The web site does not ask the user to supply personal information.
8. The web site loads quickly.
9. The web site does not openly recruit nursing staff for employment.
10. Advertising (if any) is easy to identify and is presented separately from the intellectual content.

[ Return to top of page ]

Guidelines and Indicators

These are recommended qualities for an external link. A web site must be rated as having acceptable quality using these evaluation guidelines and indicators:

Authority: The authors, sponsors and/or producer of the web site are credible and reputable.

• The author or source of the content is clearly identified.
• Credentials and professional qualifications of the author are identified and verifiable.
• The web site provides information on how to contact the author.
• The web site provides information on how to access the source of the web content, if appropriate.
• The web site provides information on how to contact the sponsor or producer.
• The mission and purpose of the web site are clearly stated.
• Any business, political, or organizational affiliations of the sponsor or producer are clearly identified.
• The web content is copyright protected, and the name of the copyright holder is identified.

Timeliness: The web site content is up-to-date.

• The publication or last revision date is identified.
• The content is current, based on the current state of knowledge development for health information.
• Manual spot checking or sampling of links shows them to be functional (not expired or moved).

Accuracy: The web site content is accurate.

• The content appears factual, valid, and well researched.
• The content provides clarity, not ambiguity.
• There are no recognizable omissions of data, i.e., the content is complete.
• The content provides original information.
• Verifiable sources are cited in the web content.
• Verifiable references are listed with the web content.
• There are no spelling or grammatical errors.
• Any charts or graphs are clearly labeled and easy to understand.
• A selection process for linked web pages is identified.
• The web content is peer-reviewed.
• An identified editor has edited the web content.
• Fact checkers who are named have reviewed the web content.

Objectivity: The web site content is objective.

• Opinions (interpretations of facts) are clearly differentiated from facts.
• The content is free of emotionally or politically charged language.
• The content is free of bias.
• Advertising is absent or minimal.
• Linked web pages are relevant.

Design: The web site is well designed.

• Any graphics, art, or multimedia serve a function and are not merely decorative.
• The hierarchy is easy to navigate, e.g., adequate internal links and forward and backward capabilities.
• A minimum of scrolling is needed. Pages are limited to 1-2 pages if appropriate. The main page is short.
• A web site map is available.
• Instructions for how to navigate the web site are included.
• The web site offers search capability.
• There is a consistent and pleasing appearance throughout the web site, e.g., colors, fonts, and page layouts.
• The web site reflects a level of creativity.
• There are no web pages still under construction.
• The web site has been reviewed or ranked by a credible online agency.

Accessibility: The web site is easily accessible.

• The web site accommodates users with disabilities.
• The web site accommodates users with lower end computer capabilities, e.g., text-only alternative.
• The web site has minimal downtime.
• The web site is a secured site.
• The user can contact the webmaster.

[ Return to top of page ]

References

Alexander, J. & Tate, M.A. (1996, July). Evaluating Web resources: Checklist for an informational web page. Wolfgram Memorial Library, Widener University, Chester, PA. Retrieved Septermber 23, 2002, from the World Wide Web: How to Recognize an Informational Web Page

Beck, S. (1997). Evaluation criteria. The Good, The Bad & The Ugly: or, Why It’s a Good Idea to Evaluate Web Sources. Retrieved September 23, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://lib.nmsu.edu/instruction/evalcrit.html

Hardin Library for the Health Sciences. (2001, December 12). Hardin MD: Submitting a site. Hardin Library for the Health Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA. Retrieved September 27, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://www.lib.uiowa.edu/hardin/md/submit.html

Harris, R. (1997, November 17). Evaluating Internet research sources. Vanguard University, Costa Mesa, CA. Retrieved September 23, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.virtualsalt.com/evalu8it.htm

Iona College Libraries. (1996). Evaluating world wide web sites. Iona College, New Rochelle, NY. Retrieved September 23, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.iona.edu/library/research/wwweval.htm

McGonigle, D. (1998, Fall). How to evaluate web sites. The Online Journal of Nursing Informatics, 2(2). Retrieved September 23, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://milkman.cac.psu.edu/~dxm12/OJNI.html

Moody Medical Library Information Gateway. (2000, October 6). Evaluating health resources on the web. Moody Medical Library, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galvaston, TX. Retrieved September 23, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://ar.utmb.edu/portals/mml_portal.asp

Smith, A. (1997). Testing the surf: Criteria for evaluating Internet information resources. The Public-Access Computer Systems Review, 8(3). Retrieved September 23, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://info.lib.uh.edu/pr/v8/n3/smit8n3.html

Tyburski, G. (1997, June 3). Evaluating the quality of information on the Internet: A checklist. The Virtual Chase: Legal Research on the Internet. Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll, LLP. Retrieved September 23, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.virtualchase.com/quality/checklist_print.html

[ Return to top of page ]