| Popis: |
The internet is a common source of health information for patients with cancer. Despite research surrounding the quality of online resources for individual types of cancer, these results may not necessarily be easily extrapolated to cancer resources as a whole. Thus, we aim to use a standardized tool to produce generalizable results by analyzing the quality of online resources for the most common cancers. Educational websites pertaining to breast, lung, prostate, and colorectal cancers were searched using multiple search engines. After screening against pre-specified inclusion criteria, the most visible 100 websites for each cancer were extracted for analysis. A validated tool was then used to assess their quality. Pooled results were evaluated using descriptive and inferential statistics. Of the 400 analyzed websites, 43% were commercially affiliated, and these were significantly associated with greater use of biased language. Thirty percent of websites disclosed authorship, 47% cited at least one reliable source, and 43% were updated within the last 2 years. The average Flesch-Kincaid readability was determined to be at a grade 10.9 level, which is significantly more difficult than the recommended grade 6 level. Risk factors, symptoms, and detection were the most accurately covered topics. However, most websites did not cover prognosis. This study comprehensively examines the quality of online cancer resources for the four most common cancers. Our results could help guide the development of future resources, support patient education endeavors, and raise awareness among healthcare providers about the limitations of online cancer resources. |
Full text from SpringerLink