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.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Self-efficacy to Get Cancer-Related Information or Advice.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- American Anesthesiology Residency Programs: Website Usability Analysis.Interactive journal of medical research · 2022Article
- The Provision of Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine Information and Services: a Review of World Leading Oncology Hospital Websites.Current oncology reports · 2022Review
- 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 · 2022Article
- Methodological Guidelines for Systematic Assessments of Health Care Websites Using Web Analytics: Tutorial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- An Analysis of US Academic Medical Center Websites: Usability Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Website usability analysis of United States emergency medicine residencies.AEM education and training · 2021Article
- Analysis of the quality of meningioma education resources available on the Internet.Neuro-oncology practice · 2021Article
- Applying Website Rankings to Digital Health Centers in the United States to Assess Public Engagement: Website Usability Study.JMIR human factors · 2021Article
- Innovating the outreach of comprehensive cancer centers.Molecular oncology · 2019Review
- An Evaluation and Ranking of Children's Hospital Websites in the United States.Journal of medical Internet research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
26472325What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.