['reduced fetal movements (RFM) are experienced by 46-50% of women prior to the diagnosis of stillbirth. Empowering women with evidenced-based information regarding RFM may allow for prompt contact with a health care provider and access to appropriate management. Use of the Internet is growing in popularity as a source of pregnancy information to aid mothers׳ decision-making. This study aimed to identify and examine the available online information for pregnant women regarding RFM.', 'a systematic search was performed using Google, Yahoo and Bing to identify the most popular websites giving information about RFM. The websites were assessed for readability, accountability and content using the Flesh-Kincaid ease of readability score; the Silberg criteria; and by comparison to evidence-based guidelines respectively. Chat forums were assessed using a qualitative thematic analysis.', "70 information articles and 63 chat forums were analysed from 77 unique websites. The mean readability score was 65.7 (suitable for the average 13-15 year old) and therefore above the recommended level set for health materials; only 15 (21.4%) websites met all accountability criteria; and 43 (70%) websites contained information that was not in accordance with evidence-based recommendations. Typical questions on forums were 'Is this normal? What should I do?' and responses were 'Better safe than sorry', 'There is no harm in calling'."] Is online information for women and their families regarding reduced fetal movements of variable quality , readability and accountability?