Treatments for Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Evidence, Advocacy, and the Internet
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Treatments for Neurodevelopmental Disorders : Evidence, Advocacy, and the Internet. / Di Pietro, Nina C; Whiteley, Louise Emma; Mizgalewicz, Ania; Illes, Judy.
In: Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, Vol. 43, No. 1, 2013, p. 122-133.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Treatments for Neurodevelopmental Disorders
T2 - Evidence, Advocacy, and the Internet
AU - Di Pietro, Nina C
AU - Whiteley, Louise Emma
AU - Mizgalewicz, Ania
AU - Illes, Judy
PY - 2013
Y1 - 2013
N2 - The Internet is a major source of health-related information for parents of sick children despite concerns surrounding quality. For neurodevelopmental disorders, the websites of advocacy groups are a largely unexamined source of information. We evaluated treatment information posted on nine highly-trafficked advocacy websites for autism, cerebral palsy, and fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. We found that the majority of claims about treatment safety and efficacy were unsubstantiated. Instead, a range of rhetorical strategies were used to imply scientific support. When peer-reviewed publications were cited, 20 % were incorrect or irrelevant. We call for new partnerships between advocacy and experts in developmental disorders to ensure better accuracy and higher transparency about how treatment information is selected and evidenced on advocacy websites.
AB - The Internet is a major source of health-related information for parents of sick children despite concerns surrounding quality. For neurodevelopmental disorders, the websites of advocacy groups are a largely unexamined source of information. We evaluated treatment information posted on nine highly-trafficked advocacy websites for autism, cerebral palsy, and fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. We found that the majority of claims about treatment safety and efficacy were unsubstantiated. Instead, a range of rhetorical strategies were used to imply scientific support. When peer-reviewed publications were cited, 20 % were incorrect or irrelevant. We call for new partnerships between advocacy and experts in developmental disorders to ensure better accuracy and higher transparency about how treatment information is selected and evidenced on advocacy websites.
U2 - 10.1007/s10803-012-1551-7
DO - 10.1007/s10803-012-1551-7
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 22592952
VL - 43
SP - 122
EP - 133
JO - Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
JF - Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
SN - 0162-3257
IS - 1
ER -
ID: 40324634