Develop a methodology for assessing credibility and reliability of sources of complementary alternative medicine (CAM) information.
Come up with three to five objective criteria to judge the credibility and reliability of a source of information on CAM, such as a book, newspaper article, or speaker, preferable on a CAM therapeutic modality.
Review one of the websites and determine how reliable the site is for CAM information, using your three to five criteria methodology.
Please do NOT use NCCAM or NIH.
Describe how a consumer's attitudes and beliefs about CAM could hinder objective assessments of reliability and credibility in CAM.
How, in detail, did you reach your conclusion about the website?
What steps could the website take to increase its credibility?© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com December 20, 2018, 11:32 am ad1c9bdddf
Develop methodology to assess credibility and reliability of CAM information online
When reviewing the credibility of sources of complementary alternative medicine (CAM) information there are several typical areas that consumers migrate toward. First, the World Wide Web offers a plethora of information and resources. It can be fairly easy to decode websites with a higher probability of reliability for factual content. Educational institutions usually end with edu. An org ending might be another credible link, especially if the organization features professionals in higher education or are top of their field. A .com site could be a company with a hidden agenda or for-profit cause. A library, bookstore or similar organization that provides books, magazines and professional publications would be another avenue to research credibility or find information.
The first and most important focal point is the publication or source of the piece to study. One might think a blogger is just some guy writing an opinion. However, the writer that has a history of scholarly and professional work is a good clue for ...
Review of complimentary alternative medicine sources and credibility criteria is discussed for those evaluating websites and other sources.