Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30627152›Full record

ArticleAdvances in urology2018

Quality of Health Information on the Internet for Prostate Cancer.

Dwayne T S Chang, Robert Abouassaly, Nathan Lawrentschuk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in urology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Premature consent and patient duties.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2021
    Article
  2. Bladder Cancer and Google Trends: Associations Between US Search Patterns and Disease Outcomes May Show Need for Improved Awareness Strategies.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Article
  3. Adverse Effects of Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy for Common Malignancies: What Is the Quality of Information Patients Are Finding Online?Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Article
  4. Radiation Oncology Online: Quality, Strategies, and Disparities.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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.

Dwayne T S ChangDepartment of Urology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, WA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4268-2479
Robert AbouassalyUrology Institute, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Nathan LawrentschukDepartment of Urology, Austin Hospital, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo compare (1) the quality of prostate cancer health information on the Internet, (2) the difference in quality between websites appearing earlier or later in the search, and (3) the sources of sponsorship for each of these websites. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe top 150 listed websites on the Google search engine for each of the 11 search terms related to prostate cancer were analysed. Quality was assessed on whether the website conforms to the principles of the Health On the Net Foundation. Each of these websites was then reviewed to determine the main source of sponsorship. Statistical analysis was performed to determine if the proportion of HON accreditation varied among the different cohorts of listed websites and among the 11 search terms used.

resultsIn total, 1650 websites were analysed. Among these, 10.5% websites were HON-accredited. The proportion of HON-accredited websites for individual search terms ranged from 3.3% to 19.3%. In comparison with the search term of "Prostate cancer," four search terms had statistically significant odds ratio of the rate of HON accreditation. Websites 51-150 were statistically less likely to have HON accreditation than websites 1-50. The top three website sponsors were journal/universities (28.8%), commercial (28.1%), and physician/surgeon (26.9%).

conclusionsThe lack of validated and unbiased websites for prostate cancer is concerning especially with increasing use of the Internet for health information. Websites sponsored or managed by the government and national departments were most likely to provide impartial health information for prostate cancer. We need to help our patients identify valid and unbiased online health resources.

Identifiers

PMID30627152
PMCPMC6305048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.