A multi-institutional study of Internet utilization by radiation oncology patients

The Impact of the Internet on Cancer Outcomes

“…6, 16 Metz, et al 20 and Smith, et al 16 found very large differences in Internet use between a cancer patient population from an academic center (48%) and a VA hospital (8%), which again might be due to differences in socioeconomic status between the hospital populations. Although in some studies the Internet is cited as the second most important source for cancer information after health professionals, 14,19 it may play a somewhat less important role when it comes to making important treatment decisions in cancer: When asked for the most important factor influencing their treatment decision, men with prostate cancer indicated that physician recommendation (51%), advice from friends and family (19%), and information obtained from books and journals (18%) were more often the most important source, with the Internet cited by only 7%.…”

“…In one study, in which different groups of persons with cancer were surveyed using the same instrument, highly significant differences in utilization of the Internet by diagnosis were observed: 16% of lung patients, 18% of head-and-neck patients, 27% of prostate patients, 34% of breast patients, and 45% of gynecologic patients reported using the Internet to obtain cancer-related information. 20 This partly reflects demographic differences between the cancer types: We know from many studies that women are more active health seekers than men, 28,29 and that younger age 7,9,10,12,14,16,20,21,24 is also associated with greater Internet use. Therefore, age and sex are confounders when comparing Internet use, and it is unclear whether differences between diagnostic groups are mainly a result of demographic differences or whether they remain significant when adjusted for patient age and sex.…”

“…12 Most consider information on the Web either very reliable (22%) or somewhat reliable (70%). 20 In another survey, 52% from a general (healthy) population who have visited health sites think that "almost all" or "most" health information they see on the Internet is credible. 29 Physicians view the quality of health information on the Web slightly more critically: They report that the last time a patient brought Internet information it was very (8%) or somewhat (66%) accurate, whereas 26% said it was not very or not at all accurate.…”

“…103 Limited information is available as to what degree persons with cancer use the Web to purchase health services and products, but at least two studies suggest that about 50% 7,20 of online persons with cancer use the Web to find information about complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), and 12% of persons with cancer who use the Internet actually purchased unconventional medical therapies over the Internet. 20 These numbers are hardly surprising, because we know that the proportion of persons living with cancer using CAM is of the same order, 104,105 and the Internet is just one of many channels through which CAM information and products can be obtained. There has been one reported case of a person with cancer who was severely harmed as a result of ordering CAM on the Web, 106 but to blame the Internet for this would be like blaming telephone books or libraries for similar events that have occurred before.…”

Intensity‐modulated radiotherapy and the Internet

“…11,12 An increasingly common source of medical information is the Internet 13,14 ; this statement is true for oncology patients in general [15][16][17] and for radiation oncology patients in particular. 18,19 In a recent survey, Metz et al noted that nearly 33% of radiation oncology patients obtained information on their disease and its treatment on the Internet. Among patients who had home computers, this percentage increased to 62%.…”