Demographic and cancer‐related differences between self‐seeking patients and supported patients: Analysis of cancer information–service data

Abstract

Objective Surrogate information seeking is quite common, and several studies have presented data on caregivers, family members, and friends who seek health information on the Internet or from a cancer‐information service (CIS) on behalf of cancer patients. However, these studies provide little information about the patients who are supported by surrogate seekers. Therefore, this study analyzed demographic and cancer‐related differences, including diverse informational needs, between self‐seeking patients and patients who benefited from surrogate seekers (ie, caregivers, family, or friends) requesting information on their behalf. Methods We conducted a retrospective audit of phone and e‐mail inquiries to a German CIS between January and December 2016 from self‐seeking patients (n = 13 723) and surrogate information seekers, as well as the corresponding supported patients (n = 6696). Results Supported patients were more likely to be males (P < 0.001), older than self‐seeking patients (P < 0.001), and older than the corresponding surrogate seekers (P < 0.001). They were also more likely to be in the diagnostic or palliative stage (P < 0.001) and were less likely to suffer from breast cancer or prostate cancer (P < 0.001) than self‐seeking patients. There were significant differences in the CIS requests of self‐seekers and surrogate seekers. Conclusions The results point to different support needs of self‐seekers and surrogate seekers. Thus, surrogate seekers and their corresponding supported patients should be seen as a separate target group to self‐seeking patients, with the former requiring informational and emotional support on diverging topics and at different disease stages.

Online Health Information Seeking by Parents for Their Children: Systematic Review and Agenda for Further Research

“…For instance, existing research indicated that proxy seekers tend to be women [ 7 , 16 ], but this review showed that the gender of the parent had no influence on whether they searched the internet for their child. As suggested by Reifegerste et al [ 17 ], relational factors are relevant variables for proxy seeking and therefore a fundamental part of our conceptual model. They could explain contradictory results from past research.…”

“…First, we recommend a clear separation between parental self-seeking and parental proxy seeking. These health behaviors represent two independent processes with different motivations, circumstances, and predictors [ 7 - 9 , 16 , 17 ]. If both are considered in one study, authors must state explicitly which they are referring to.…”

“…Existing theory-based literature on models of OHIS did not consider proxy seekers [ 66 ]. Nonetheless, health characteristics of the supported search participants are associated with the search behavior of the proxy seeker [ 17 , 67 ]. To address this gap, we present a conceptual model on OHIS by proxy.…”

“…Research has shown significant differences in characteristics of self-seekers and proxy seekers [ 7 - 9 , 16 ]. OHIS for oneself is typically based on different motives, needs, and circumstances than searching for someone else [ 8 , 16 , 17 ]. In addition, a recent study by Reifegerste and Bachl [ 18 ] suggests that it is not merely the individual factors in the seeker that have an influence on proxy seeking, but also relational factors between seeker and search subject and the relationship’s individual characteristics.…”

Online Health Information Seeking by Parents for Their Children: Systematic Review and Agenda for Further Research (Preprint)

“…Research has shown significant differences in characteristics of self-seekers and proxy seekers [7][8][9]16]. OHIS for oneself is typically based on different motives, needs, and circumstances than searching for someone else [8,16,17]. In addition, a recent study by Reifegerste and Bachl [18] suggests that it is not merely the individual factors in the seeker that have an influence on proxy seeking, but also relational factors between seeker and search subject and the relationship's individual characteristics.…”