The study analysed 36 international mobile and web-based symptom ‘checkers’ and found they produced the correct diagnosis as the first result just 36 per cent of the time.
The research also found the advice provided on when and where to seek health care was accurate only 49 per cent of the time.
Edith Cowan University lead author Michella Hill said the online tools could be unreliable and dangerous.
“We've all been guilty of being ‘cyber-chondriacs’ and Googling at the first sign of a niggle or headache,” Ms Hill said.
“For people who lack health knowledge, they may think the advice they're given is accurate or that their condition is not serious when it may be.”
Advice for emergency and urgent care cases was appropriate about 60 per cent of the time but, for non-emergencies, this figure dropped to 30 to 40 per cent.
“These sites are not a replacement for going to the doctor, but they can be useful in providing more information once you do have an official diagnosis,” she said.
Ms Hill said she was concerned by a lack of government regulation on where information was being sourced on websites.
“Generally the triage advice erred on the side of caution, which in some ways is good but can lead to people going to an emergency department when they really don't need to,” she said.
10°C