Drug Information Directory Review Criteria

Resources are assigned a 5-star rating based on responses to a series of closed (yes/no) questions to determine the credibility of the author(s), the reliability and accuracy of the content, and technical aspects of websites (for example if the website has a paywall). In addition to making the Directory easy to navigate, the 5-star rating system is designed to avoid potential bias. The review also contains some information about the features of the resource and the intended audience, for example, mental health professionals, parents, young people or policymakers.

The Drug Information Directory does not provide a review of the organisation(s) that publish the website, but rather the website itself. It also does not provide an assessment of treatment options.

Each resource in the Drug Information Directory is assessed based on specific, weighted criteria: authorship (23%), relevance (33%), and reliability/accuracy (43%). The criteria are then aggregated to give a total score, which is rounded to the nearest half star.

Criterion 1: Authorship (Weight: 24%)

The purpose of this criterion is to identify who the author of the content is and whether they are an authority on the subject.

The reviewers consider the transparency of the individual or organisation that published the site; the credentials of the author(s); and whether the author(s) and publisher are reputable sources of information, such as accredited academic institutions, peer-reviewed articles, scholarly databases or government websites and research.

Criterion 2: Relevance (Weight: 33%)

The purpose of the criterion is to check if the website is relevant for the Drug Information Directory and its audience, to ensure that the content is current, and to understand the purpose behind the website.

The reviewers consider the relevance of the information for a variety of audiences, including health professionals, researchers, parents and students; if the information has some level of detail on alcohol and other drugs, health promotion or mental health; and whether there is evidence that the site is maintained and updated regularly.

Criterion 3: Reliability / Accuracy (Weight: 43%)

The purpose of the criterion is to check that information is properly referenced, from a trusted source, and is comparable to other sites on a similar topic.

The reviewers consider whether research or information is cited from a credible source; whether the information provided aligns with other sites.

Review summary

This section of the Drug Information Directory reviews refers to the written part of the review and includes the intended purpose and audience of the website; and identifies any affiliations, potential biases or stigmatising or discriminatory content.

Rejected resources:

Websites are rejected if they fall under the following categories:

• The website is a treatment service only
• The website does not have information relevant to alcohol and other drugs, health promotion, or mental health
• The majority of links on the website do not work
• The information on the website is completely inaccurate
• The website hasn’t been updated in 5 or more years and does not qualify as an archived resource
• The website falls under the following categories:
  • Service, news or media resource targeting a non-Australian or non-international audience.
  • Resource whose primary purpose or content is a blog (excluding corporate blogs of peak AOD organisations), discussion group, forum or similar.
  • Resource about an organisation’s policy, for example an AOD policy for staff or students.
  • Resource from a drug testing provider, equipment seller, or drink-drive education provider.
  • Resource whose primary purpose is to sell something.

Badges

Badges will be displayed next to websites reviewed in the Drug Information Directory if the website contains any of the following features:

1) Is the website a government website, or affiliated with/sponsored by the government?

2) Is the website affiliated with an academic institution?

3) Is the website industry-sponsored? (i.e. alcohol, tobacco, pharmaceutical industries)

4) Is the website a community-led source of information?

5) Is the website specifically targeted towards a community? (i.e. multicultural, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, religious, LGBTIQ, user-generated and secular)

6) Is the website mobile friendly?

7) Does the website have a paywall or login barrier?