Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35877218›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2022

Quality of Online Information on Multiple Myeloma Available for Laypersons.

Henrike Staemmler, Sandra Sauer, Emma Pauline Kreutzer, Juliane Brandt, Karin Jordan, Michael Kreuter, Mark Kriegsmann, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Carsten Müller-Tidow, Gerlinde Egerer and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. A web-based knowledge database to provide evidence-based information to cancer patients: Utilization within the PIKKO study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    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

11 authors.

Henrike StaemmlerDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410/69120, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
Sandra SauerDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410/69120, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
Emma Pauline KreutzerDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410/69120, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
Juliane BrandtDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410/69120, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
Karin JordanDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410/69120, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
Michael KreuterCenter for Interstitial and Rare Lung Diseases, Department of Pneumology, Thoraxklinik, University Hospital Heidelberg, 69126 Heidelberg, Germany.
Mark KriegsmannGerman Center for Lung Research (DZL), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7319-3646
Hartmut GoldschmidtDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410/69120, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0961-0035
Carsten Müller-TidowDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410/69120, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
Gerlinde EgererDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410/69120, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
Katharina KriegsmannDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410/69120, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Online information can increase patients' competence and engagement. However, there are concerns regarding invalid information. Overall, 300 websites and 50 YouTube videos on multiple myeloma (MM) were evaluated. The websites did not differ between the search engines or search ranks. The median time since the last update was 9 months. The 63 unique websites showed a poor general quality (median JAMA score 2 of 4, only 18% with a valid HON certificate). The patient- (user-) focused quality was medium to poor (median sum DISCERN score 41 out of 80 points). The overall reading level was difficult requiring at least a 12th US school grade. The content level was low (median 24 out of 73 points). Sixteen percent contained misleading/wrong facts. Websites provided by foundation/advocacies showed a significantly higher general and patient- (user-) focused quality. For videos, the median time since upload was 18 months. Judged by the HON foundation score ~80% of videos showed a medium general quality. The patient- (user-) focused quality was medium to poor (median sum DISCERN score 43 points). The content level was very low (median 8 points). MM relevant websites and videos showed a medium to low general, patient- (user-) focused and content quality. Therefore, incorporation of quality indices and regular review is warranted.

Indexed as

Multiple MyelomaHumansSearch Enginemultiple myelomaonline health informationpatient education

Identifiers

PMID35877218
PMCPMC9324394

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.