Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26472325›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2017

Cancer Center Website Rankings in the USA: Expanding Benchmarks and Standards for Effective Public Outreach and Education.

Timothy R Huerta, Daniel M Walker, Eric W Ford

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Self-efficacy to Get Cancer-Related Information or Advice.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Analysis of Internet-Based Search Patterns Utilized by Glioma Patients as Information Source.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Timothy R HuertaDepartment of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, 2231 North High Street, 265 Northwood and High Building, Columbus, OH, 43201, USA. Timothy.Huerta@osumc.edu.
Daniel M WalkerDepartment of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, 2231 North High Street, 265 Northwood and High Building, Columbus, OH, 43201, USA.
Eric W FordHealth Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 N. Broadway, Hampton House 533, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 68 National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated comprehensive and cancer centers have been tasked with leading the campaign in the fight against cancer, as well as providing education and outreach to the public. Therefore, it is important for these organizations to have an effective online presence to disseminate information and engage patients. The purpose of this study was to assess both the functionality and usability of cancer centers' websites. The 68 center web domains were evaluated using two separate but complementary approaches. First, a webcrawler was used to score each website on five dimensions: accessibility, content, marketing, technology, and usability. Rankings on each dimension and an average ranking were calculated for all 68 centers. Second, a three-reader system was used to determine a list of all functionalities present on the websites. Both webcrawler scores and functionality prevalence were compared across center type. No differences were observed in webcrawler scores between comprehensive and cancer centers. Mean scores on all dimensions ranged between 5.47 and 7.09. For the functionality assessment, 64 unique functions were determined and categorized into 12 domains, with the average center possessing less than 50 % of the functions. This census assessment of NCI centers' websites suggests the need for improvement to capitalize on new dissemination platforms available online. Progress in development of this technology can help achieve the goals of public education and outreach to a broad audience. This paper presents performance guidelines evaluated against best-demonstrated practice to facilitate social media use improvement.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingInternetCommunity-Institutional RelationsConsumer Health InformationHumansNational Cancer Institute (U.S.)Patient Education as TopicSocial MediaUnited StatesCancer centersComprehensive cancer centersNCIPatient educationSocial media

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.