No abstract

This study describes Internet use by breast cancer patients highlighting search patterns and examining the impact of web-based information on the clinical encounter. From September 2011 to January 2012, breast cancer patients at a cancer center completed a survey. Answers were closed and open-ended. Eighty-one patients were approached and 56 completed the survey. Forty-five (80 %) respondents used the Internet and 32 (71 %) searched for breast cancer information. All used Google as their principal search engine. To evaluate quality, 47 % referred to author credentials and 41 % examined references. Most sought information with respect to treatment or prognosis. Eighty percent felt that the information increased their knowledge and influenced treatment decision making for 53 %. This study highlights search patterns and factors used by breast cancer patients in seeking web-based information. Physicians must appreciate that patients use the Internet and address discrepancies between information sought and that which is available.

No abstract

The internet is an important source of health information, and yet the quality of the resources that patients' access can vary widely. Previous research has evaluated the quality of information for several types of cancer; however, this has not yet been done for cervical cancer beyond treatment information. The goal of this project was to systematically evaluate the quality of resources for cervical cancer information available against a range of metrics, including content breadth and accuracy, readability, and accountability. Methods An internet search was performed using the term "cervical cancer" using Google and two metasearch engines, Dogpile and Yippy. The top-100 websites returned across all three engines were evaluated using a validated structured rating tool. Results Only 32% of websites disclosed their author and only 38% used citations, while 64% of websites had been updated in the last two years. Readability was at university-level or higher for 19% of websites, and high-school level for 78%. Coverage was highest for etiology and risk factors (93% of websites) and prevention strategies such as pap smears and vaccines (92%); coverage was lowest for prognosis (49%), staging (52%), side effects (47%), and follow-up (25%). When a topic was covered the information was predominantly accurate, and few websites had inaccurate information. At least one social-media platform was linked to by 79% of websites. Conclusions This project highlights the strengths and limitations in the quality of the top-100 informational cervical cancer websites. These findings can inform the dialogue between health care providers and patients around selecting and evaluating information resources. These findings can also inform specific improvements to make online resources for cervical cancer more accessible, comprehensive, and relevant to patients.

Introduction: Testicular cancer is the most common solid malignancy diagnosed in young men aged 15–29. This population is also the age group that searches most actively for health information online. This study systematically evaluates the quality of websites available to patients with testicular cancer. Methods: The term “testicular cancer” was inputted into the search engines Google, Dogpile, and Yippy. The top 100 websites intended for patient education were compiled. A validated structural rating tool was used to evaluate the websites with respect to attribution, currency, disclosure, interactivity, readability, and content. Results: Less than half of the websites (44) disclosed authorship. Sixty-one websites provided a last modified date, and of those, 46 were updated in the last two years. The average readability level was 11.01 using the Flesh Kincaid grade level system. The most accurate topic was treatment, with 82 websites being completely accurate and containing all required information. The least accurate topic was prognosis, with 27 being completely accurate. Conclusions: These results show that authorship and currency are lacking in many online testicular resources, making it difficult for patients to validate the reliability of information. The high average readability of testicular cancer websites can affect comprehension. Topics such as prognosis were incompletely covered although represent an area for which patients often seek more information. These results can be used to counsel patients on the strength and weaknesses of online testicular cancer resources.