ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2018
The Quality of Romanian Breast Cancer Websites: a Five-Year Longitudinal Assessment.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Autism-Related Information on Websites and General-Purpose Artificial Intelligence Chatbots: Comparative, Bilingual Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Assessing personal and health system barriers to breast cancer early diagnosis practices for women over 20 years old in Cluj-Napoca, Romania.Medicine and pharmacy reports · 2025Article
- User's Search for Information: A Multi-Language Cross-Sectional Assessment of Websites about Healthcare-Associated Infections.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2024Article
- What Patients Find on the Internet When Looking for Information About Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Multilanguage Cross-sectional Assessment.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Internet has become an important source of overall health information and seems to be the second common source of information used by patients in the process of decision-making before breast surgery. The goal of this study was to monitor Romanian breast cancer websites and their quality over a period of 5 years. We evaluated a sample of 20 websites selected from Google's first search results pages using specific rating scores for e-health quality, completeness, accuracy, and potential risk, in 2011 and 2016, respectively. Only 15 (75%) of the websites in the 2011 sample were accessible in 2016 and only two (10%) retained real-life visibility (Google PageRank < 20). The mean quality scores at baseline (2011) and follow-up (2016), respectively, were as follows: e-health quality 3.80 vs. 4.05; completeness 4.23 vs. 5.43; accuracy 5.74 vs. 6.35; and potential risk score 7.60 vs. 7.30. All quality scores were low or, at best, modest and did not improve significantly over the 5-year period. The results of the study draw attention to the need for programs aiming to improve the ability of breast cancer patients to screen the online health resources and to better regulate the medical Internet to safeguard the best interest of health information seekers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27888472What 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.