Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30079123›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of health education2018

A Comprehensive Analysis of How Environmental Risks of Breast Cancer are Portrayed on the Internet.

Shibani Kulkarni, Kaleea Lewis, Swann Arp Adams, Heather M Brandt, Jamie R Lead, John R Ureda, Delores Fedrick, Chris Mathews, Daniela B Friedman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of health education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. How Do African-American Community Members' Perceptions About Environmental Risks of Breast Cancer Compare with the Current State of the Science?Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Article
  3. Culturally Appropriate Breast Cancer and Environmental Risk Messages: Targeting Racially and Ethnically Diverse Mothers.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors.

Shibani KulkarniDepartment of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Room 529, Columbia, SC 29208.
Kaleea LewisDepartment of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Room 529, Columbia, SC 29208.
Swann Arp AdamsDepartment of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of South Carolina.
Heather M BrandtDepartment of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, University of South Carolina.
Jamie R LeadDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, University of South Carolina.
John R UredaInsights Consulting, Inc. 2728 Wilmot Ave., Columbia, SC 29205-254.
Delores FedrickChester County Literacy Council, 109 Ella Street, Chester, SC, 29706.
Chris MathewsTurning Pages Greater Columbia Literacy Council, 4711 Forest Drive, Suite 3, PMB 267, Columbia SC 29206.
Daniela B FriedmanDepartment of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, University of South Carolina.

Funding

Strategies for Communicating the Environmental Risks of CancerR03ES027406 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA AT COLUMBIA · PI FRIEDMAN, DANIELA B. · 2017 to 2018
$145k
NIEHS NIH HHS R03 ES027406
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEffective online communication about the environmental risk factors of breast cancer is essential because of the multitude of environmental exposures and debate regarding the conclusiveness of scientific evidence. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the content, readability, and cultural sensitivity of online resources focused on the environmental risks factors of breast cancer.

methodsA purposive sample of webpages focused on environmental risk factors of breast cancer was obtained through a Google search using 17 search terms. Using nonparametric statistics, we assessed the content, readability, and cultural appropriateness of 235 webpages.

resultsEighty-two percent of webpages referred to research studies in their content. For the majority of sites, readability was at a high-school reading grade level. Webpages were not explicitly intended for specific racial/ethnic groups. DISCUSSION: Technical language and non-culturally specific messages may hinder users' attention to and comprehension of online breast cancer information. Additional research is needed to examine in-depth the accuracy of this online content. TRANSLATION TO HEALTH EDUCATION PRACTICE: Findings suggest that collaborations between scientists, health educators, website designers/media professionals, and the community will be critical to the delivery of accurate, up-to-date, plain-language, and culturally sensitive information about breast cancer and the environment.

Indexed as

Breast cancerenvironmental risk factorsreadabilitywebsite content

Identifiers

PMID30079123
PMCPMC6075842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.