Online information on oncologists’ and non-medical practitioners’ websites in Germany: A critical comparison

Schallock, Henriette; Bartmann, Berit; Keinki, Christian; Huebner, Jutta

doi:10.1016/j.pec.2019.05.022

Cited by 7 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Laversin and colleagues showed that most websites, which do not apply for HONcode certification, also do not fulfill its criteria [ 23 ]. A further website analysis conducted between April and July 2018 showed that privacy protection of websites increased after the GDPR reform in May 2018 [ 24 ]. One possibility for improving website quality may be certification required by law, to ensure fulfillment of requirements for data reliability, authorship, and funding.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Internet Information on Oral Cancer Drugs: a Critical Comparison between Website Providers

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cancer patients need access to high-quality information, when making decisions about oral cancer drugs. The internet is often used as a source of information published by highly heterogeneous providers. The objective was to evaluate the quality of website providers supplying online information about oral cancer drugs. One hundred websites were analyzed using content-related and formal criteria, selected from three existing evaluation methods used for cancer websites, for medical information (defined by the German Agency for Quality in Medicine), and for the “fact box” tool. A web search by a patient was simulated to identify websites to evaluate. ANOVA was used to assess information provided by non-profit organizations (governmental and non-governmental), online newspapers, for-profit organizations, and private/unknown providers. Content-related quality differences were found between online newspapers and all other categories, with online newspapers ranking significantly lower than for-profit and non-profit websites. As for formal criteria, for-profit providers scored significantly lower than non-profit providers and online newspapers for the aspect of transparency. Internet information on oral cancer drugs published by non-profit organizations constitutes the best available web-based source of information for cancer patients. Health literacy and e-health literacy should be promoted in the public domain to allow patients to reliably apply web-based information. Certification should be required by law to ensure fulfillment of requirements for data reliability and transparency (authorship and funding) before health professionals recommend websites to cancer patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Internet Information on Oral Cancer Drugs: a Critical Comparison between Website Providers

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Details of the search strategies and the information finally assessed are described in the respective publications. Websites: o 77 websites containing patient information on oncology, evaluated by two raters (one medical student, one physician) [ 13 ] o 60 websites on cancer diets, evaluated by two raters (two students of medicine and medical informatics) [ 14 ] o 50 websites on thyroid cancer, evaluated by four raters (one patient, two other lay people, one physician) [ 15 ] o 96 German websites of oncologists and non-medical practitioners, evaluated by two raters (both medical students) [ 16 ] o 40 websites containing information on diet and nutrition for cancer patients, evaluated by four raters (two medical students, two lay people) [article submitted to Archives of Public Health] PDAs: 22 PDAs evaluated by four raters (two medical students, two physicians) [article submitted to BMC Medical Informatics and Decision-Making] QPLs: 46 QPLs specifically for cancer patients. evaluated by four raters (two medical students, two physicians) [ 17 ] Videos: o 26 videos on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in oncology evaluated by four raters (two medical students, two physicians) [article in progress] o 30 videos on diet and nutrition for cancer patients evaluated by four raters (two medical students, two physicians) [article in progress] …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Websites: o 77 websites containing patient information on oncology, evaluated by two raters (one medical student, one physician) [ 13 ] o 60 websites on cancer diets, evaluated by two raters (two students of medicine and medical informatics) [ 14 ] o 50 websites on thyroid cancer, evaluated by four raters (one patient, two other lay people, one physician) [ 15 ] o 96 German websites of oncologists and non-medical practitioners, evaluated by two raters (both medical students) [ 16 ] o 40 websites containing information on diet and nutrition for cancer patients, evaluated by four raters (two medical students, two lay people) [article submitted to Archives of Public Health] …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aim of our working group therefore was, to develop a set of instruments for modern formats based on the consented criteria. Over the course of the past eight years (2014—2022), we have designed quality assessment tools for different types of (online available) patient information: websites [ 13 – 16 ], patient decision aids (PDAs) [article submitted to BMC Medical Informatics and Decision-Making], question prompt lists (QPLs) [ 17 ], and videos.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development and analysis of quality assessment tools for different types of patient information – websites, decision aids, question prompt lists, and videos

Josfeld

Huebner

2023

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Our working group has developed a set of quality assessment tools for different types of patient information material. In this paper we review and evaluate these tools and their development process over the past eight years. Methods We compared the content and structure of quality assessment tools for websites, patient decision aids (PDAs), question prompt lists (QPLs), and videos. Using data from their various applications, we calculated inter-rater concordance using Kendall’s W. Results The assessment tools differ in content, structure and length, but many core aspects remained throughout the development over time. We found a relatively large variance regarding the amount of quality aspects combined into one item, which may influence the weighting of those aspects in the final scores of evaluated material. Inter-rater concordance was good in almost all applications of the tool. Subgroups of similar expertise showed higher concordance rates than the overall agreement. Conclusion All four assessment tools are ready to be used by people of different expertise. However, varying expertise may lead to some differences in the resulting assessments when using the tools. The lay and patient perspective needs to be further explored and taken into close consideration when refining the instruments.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, there are substantial differences between oncologists' and non-medical practitioners' websites [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A web-based knowledge database to provide evidence-based information to cancer patients: Utilization within the PIKKO study

Schneider,

Altmann,

Brandt

et al. 2024

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose In the context of cancer, a high amount of dangerous disinformation exists online. High quality information websites are less visible in online searches, and profit-driven websites have lower quality. As part of the PIKKO project, a web-based knowledge database (WDB) was used to provide cancer patients with quality-assured, evidence-based information. This paper aims to provide information about the usage (Who? How? What?) and the effects regarding health literacy of WDB. Methods A patient survey and automatically generated logfile data were evaluated. Two user groups, patients and patient navigators (PNs), were compared. Results The 13 PNs were responsible for 1/3 of all accesses over the entire duration of the project. The 413 patients used WDB twice on average and spent an average of 12 minutes per session online (PNs: 9 minutes per session, more frequently). The top 3 topics of interest were ‘therapy’, ‘nutrition’ and ‘carcinogenesis’ for the patients, and ‘therapy’, ‘naturopathy’ and ‘legal regulations/support’ for the PNs. Of the patients surveyed, 69% said that WDB was helpful in making informed decisions, 76% found the information they wanted and 90% thought WDB was an appropriate way to provide information. Conclusion Our WDB provided important information about cancer and its treatment on a digital way both, to patients and PNs. In routine cancer care, the WDB can improve health literacy and informed decision-making. Trial registration: This study was retrospectively registered in the German Clinical Trial Register under DRKS00016703 (21 Feb 2019, retrospectively registered). https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00016703

show abstract

Online information on oncologists’ and non-medical practitioners’ websites in Germany: A critical comparison

Cited by 7 publications

References 29 publications

Internet Information on Oral Cancer Drugs: a Critical Comparison between Website Providers

Internet Information on Oral Cancer Drugs: a Critical Comparison between Website Providers

Development and analysis of quality assessment tools for different types of patient information – websites, decision aids, question prompt lists, and videos

A web-based knowledge database to provide evidence-based information to cancer patients: Utilization within the PIKKO study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About