ReviewBreast cancer research and treatment2019
Quality of DCIS information on the internet: a content analysis.
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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Labels, Language and Other Strategies to Improve Communication About Lowest Grade Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Qualitative Interviews With Women and Physicians.Psycho-oncology · 2026Article
- Assessing the Reliability and Validity of Principles for Health-Related Information on Social Media (PRHISM) for Evaluating Breast Cancer Treatment Videos on YouTube: Instrument Validation Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- U-shaped association between social media usage frequency and suggestibility by internet health information in Chinese online population with pre-diabetes and diabetes: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Labels, Language, and Other Strategies to Improve Communication About Lower Grade Forms of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast: A National Delphi Survey.International journal of breast cancer · 2025Article
- Age and race/ethnicity differences in decisional conflict in women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ.BMC women's health · 2024Article
- Prediction Models and Decision Aids for Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Systematic Literature Review.Cancers · 2022Review
- Article
- 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 · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
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
Identifiers
What 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.