Appendix 1. Scoring criteria
Positive
  1. Multiple types of grafts: biological and mechanical with guide to who has which (age >65 years biological)

    • 0 – Mentions only one graft

    • 1 – Mentions all but does not offer guide

    • 2 – Mentions all and offers guide

  2. Multiple types of procedure: Thoracotomy, minimally invasive procedure, transcatheter aortic valve replacement

    • 0 – Mentions only one method

    • 1 – Mentions some

    • 2 – Mentions all

  3. Advantages and disadvantages of biological and mechanical (warfarin, clicking, deterioration)

    • 0 – No evaluation given

    • 1 – Partial evaluation given (for example, advantages of both or advantages and disadvantages of one)

    • 2 – Full evaluation given

  4. In op complications

    • 0 – Does not mention

    • 1 – Mentions some and does not offer evaluation

    • 2 – Comprehensive with evaluation

  5. Post op complications (heartblock, thromboembolism, deterioration)

    • 0 – Does not mention

    • 1 – Mentions some and does not offer evaluation

    • 2 – Comprehensive with evaluation

  6. Indications for surgery — symptoms

    • 0 – Does not mention

    • 1 – Mentions some and does not offer evaluation

    • 2 – Comprehensive with evaluation

  7. Recovery (time off work usually 2–3 months, valve noise)

    • 0 – Does not mention

    • 1 – Mentions some and does not offer evaluation

    • 2 – Comprehensive with evaluation

Negative
  1. Misleading in terms of main procedure (for example, transcatheter procedure, minithoracotomy as mainstay)

    • 0 – Not evident

    • 1 – Unclear

    • 2 – Clearly supporting one form of procedure

  2. Bias towards type/make of graft

    • 0 – Not evident

    • 1 – Partially supports one or a few type(s)/make(s) of valve

    • 2 – Clearly supporting one type/make of valve

  3. Provides false information of any sort

    • 0 – Not evident

    • 1 – Occurs once

    • 2 – Occurs more than once


Scoring system designed based on:
  1. Information known to be important and likely to be of interest to a patient

  2. Previously published test for reliability of internet information12

  3. Aspects of HON guideline criteria11