In this blog post, we’ll examine the pros and cons of online medical information and discuss what we should consider first to ensure reliable medical care.
A stylish mom hands over a referral letter. Before I could even finish reading the note explaining that her child’s fever wouldn’t subside, she abruptly asked, “What’s wrong with him?” Seeing the look on her face—as if she expected me to diagnose him at a glance—I took a deep breath to steady myself. The child looked exhausted after suffering from a high fever for over a week; his lips were chapped, and his eyes were bloodshot. There was a red rash on the neck, and a palpable lump could be felt. The doctor observed the child while considering various possibilities and mentioned a suspicion of Kawasaki disease, but the mother immediately responded, “Kawasaki? My child seems a bit different. Are you sure it’s that disease?” with a look of skepticism. The doctor explained that symptoms can vary from patient to patient and that complications can still arise even in atypical cases. However, the mother did not seem satisfied with that answer. She then asked if there were any other treatment options, and to find out what would happen if left untreated and who the leading specialist in this field was, she took out her smartphone and began searching.
I’m suddenly reminded of an article published in *TIME* a few years ago titled “What If Your Patient Is a Googler?” The article described the new challenges doctors have faced as some patients began bringing information they’d found on Google into the exam room. An increasing number of patients are presenting their own solutions to doctors or making unreasonable demands based solely on fragmented information. In the case of rare diseases, there is a possibility that the patient knows more than the doctor, but in most cases, this information is fragmentary and has limitations when it comes to leading to a proper diagnosis or treatment.
This situation is not limited to the United States alone. According to one study, 80% of American internet users look up their health information online, and 63% of them said this information influences how they manage their illness. However, only 25% of them check the source or publication date of the information, while the majority do not consider its quality. A similar situation is becoming increasingly common in Korea as well, with more patients using online information to self-diagnose before visiting a hospital.
Information on the internet has both advantages and disadvantages. If understood correctly, it can facilitate communication between patients and doctors and reduce the need for unnecessary explanations. However, if the information is incorrect, it not only takes a long time to correct it but also poses significant challenges in resolving the patient’s distrust. To explain this, the theory of Daniel Kahneman, Professor Emeritus at Princeton University, is often cited. He explained that two modes of thinking—namely, “fast thinking” and “slow thinking”—coexist in the human brain. Fast thinking is emotional and intuitive, acting immediately, while slow thinking involves thinking slowly and logically to control behavior. Generally, people tend to prefer fast thinking, so they easily believe and accept information they first encounter on the internet or in the media. This tendency, combined with the human tendency to value first impressions, results in people being reluctant to correct information, even if it is incorrect.
So, how should patients use the internet to obtain accurate information? Not all information on the internet is unreliable. Official websites operated by government agencies, reputable media outlets, or university hospitals are relatively trustworthy. Through these sites, patients can obtain basic information—such as the severity of their symptoms or which medical specialty to consult—and use this as supplementary material even after a hospital visit. In particular, it is helpful to check these sites for information on managing chronic diseases and preventive measures for conditions with a family history.
Advice on health risks—such as stress management, quitting smoking, and abstaining from alcohol—which are common concerns for modern people, is also easily accessible online. Furthermore, these resources are useful for seeking advice on alternative medicine when individuals are abroad or unable to access necessary medical services due to language barriers. In particular, with the widespread use of smartphones, the provision of health information through social networking services (SNS) is on the rise. Recently, several university hospitals have been using their Twitter accounts to provide information on health lectures, basic medical information, and real-time health consultations; in fact, there have been reports of cases where such SNS activities enabled quick responses in emergency situations.
Thanks to the internet, we now live in an era where patients can easily access medical information. More and more people are searching for their symptoms online before visiting a hospital or familiarizing themselves with health-related information and preventive measures beforehand. However, it is important to recognize that this is not the whole story. Much of the information circulating online lacks a clear source or is unreliable, and its content may not necessarily apply to one’s current condition. What matters is the ability to verify sources and discern reliable information. Above all, it is essential to trust the experience and knowledge of the doctor sitting in front of you, examining you in person. This is because doubting a doctor based on unreliable information can actually hinder proper treatment and recovery.
