Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31214858›Full record

ReviewBreast cancer research and treatment2019

Quality of DCIS information on the internet: a content analysis.

Jayden Blackwood, Frances C Wright, Nicole J Look Hong, Anna R Gagliardi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2019. 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Recommendations to improve patient-centred care for ductal carcinoma in situ: Qualitative focus groups with women.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    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

4 authors.

Jayden BlackwoodToronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth St, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada.
Frances C WrightSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada.
Nicole J Look HongSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada.
Anna R GagliardiToronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth St, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada. anna.gagliardi@uhnresearch.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5721-809X

Funding

Ontario Ministry of Health and Long term Care 250
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWomen with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) experience lingering confusion and anxiety, and may use the Internet for supplemental information. This study assessed the content and quality of DCIS information on the Internet.

methodsWe searched Google for English-language, publicly available DCIS information tools published from 2010 to current by non-profit organizations. We summarized tool characteristics, DCIS labels, and information important to women with DCIS corresponding to domains of a patient-centred care (PCC) framework. Tool quality was appraised with the DISCERN instrument.

resultsOf 39 tools included, most were plain language summaries published since 2016. Tools employed a median of 2.0 labels (range 1.0 to 5.0) for DCIS, most frequently non-invasive breast cancer (29, 74.4%), abnormal cells (14, 35.9%), pre-cancer (14, 35.9%), and early form of breast cancer (13, 33.3%). Tools addressed a median of 4.0 (range 2.0 to 5.0) PCC domains. Few tools contained content in the domains of fostering the relationship (30.8%), addressing emotions (41.0%), or follow-up (41.0%); 74.4% noted the risk of progression or recurrence but provided vague details. Tools were assessed as high (25.6%), moderate (48.7%), and low (25.6%) quality.

conclusionsFew DCIS information tools available to women on the Internet meet quality criteria for consumer health information or address concerns of importance to women with DCIS. By identifying a range of poorly defined terms used to label DCIS, and specific content domains that were lacking, this study identified how existing tools could be improved, and identified higher-quality tools that clinicians can use when discussing DCIS with patients.

Indexed as

Information Seeking BehaviorInternetAnxietyBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingDecision MakingEmotionsFemaleHealth Information SystemsHumansPatient-Centered CareSocial MediaConsumer health informationDuctal carcinoma in situInformation toolsInternetPatient-centred careQuality assessment

Identifiers

PMID31214858
PMCPMC6661062

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.