ArticleJournal of radiosurgery and SBRT2012
An evaluation of websites providing patient information on stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for stage I lung cancer in three Western European countries.
Article in Journal of radiosurgery and SBRT, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A web-based knowledge database to provide evidence-based information to cancer patients: Utilization within the PIKKO study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for the treatment of stage I lung cancer has been associated with improvements in population-based survival in Western Europe. As patients are increasingly accessing the Internet for information on health-related topics, we evaluated the quality, usability and readability of online patient information about SBRT in three adjacent Western European countries. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a web search and analysis between May - June 2011. Thirteen key terms were entered into the Google search engine. We analyzed websites from the Netherlands, Germany and the United Kingdom, by using the DISCERN instrument, a tool designed to assess the quality of health information on treatment choices. In addition, websites' usability and readability were examined.
resultsWe identified a total of 20 websites. None of the websites received an excellent or good quality rating and only two were rated as fair (both from the United Kingdom). DISCERN scores rated 55% (N = 11) of the websites as poor, and 35% (N = 7) as very poor. Dutch websites had the lowest scores. Five websites attained relatively high usability scores, and none had sufficient readability scores.
conclusionsDespite the fact that SBRT is widely used as a standard therapy in elderly patients with stage I NSCLC in the Netherlands, only limited high quality information is available on the Internet. Improvements in quality information available on the Internet are required in order to increase patient participation in decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29296331PMC5658865What 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.