ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2021
Adverse Effects of Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy for Common Malignancies: What Is the Quality of Information Patients Are Finding Online?
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- American, British, and Italian Online Information on the Health Risks Associated With Eating Meat: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Article
- 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 · 2021Article
- Silver lining of COVID-19: Heightened global interest in pneumococcal and influenza vaccines, an infodemiology study.Vaccine · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Little is known about the availability of high-quality online health information (OHI) for adverse effects (AEs) of radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CHT). Optimal search strategies for gaining access to high-quality OHI for these topics are not well-established. This study explores the quality of, potential disparities in, and possible search strategies for OHI pertaining to AEs of RT and CHT. One hundred twenty phrases on generalized and malignancy site-specific AEs of RT and CHT were searched on Google. The Health on the Net Foundation (HONcode) framework was applied to assess the quality of the first 100 websites for each search phrase. Comparisons of the availability of high-quality OHI were made between different languages, malignancy sites, and treatment modalities (RT vs CHT). Of the 12,000 RT and CHT AE websites analyzed, approximately half of the first 10 websites returned for each search were HONcode-accredited; approximately a fifth of the first 100 websites returned were HONcode-accredited. Such low availability of high-quality OHI persisted throughout different languages (English, French, Spanish) and common malignancy sites (breast, prostate, lung), with some variations between languages, malignancy sites, and RT vs CHT. Despite the important role of OHI in cancer patients' approach to health information gathering and decision-making, the availability of high-quality OHI for the AEs of common oncologic treatments, RT and CHT, is low across different languages and common malignancy sites. Our findings demonstrate the need for improvement in the availability of high-quality OHI. Therefore, providers should take an active stance in directing patients to high-quality OHI.
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.