Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36626094›Full record

ReviewJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2023

Evaluation of quality, readability, suitability, and usefulness of online resources available to cancer survivors.

Lydia Rosa Bourdache, Lydia Ould Brahim, Sydney Wasserman, Marrah Nicolas-Joseph, Francesca Y E Frati, Eric Belzile, Sylvie D Lambert

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Assessment of readability of gynecologic cancer clinical trials literature at National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. "The Materials Didn't Really Seem to Apply to Me": A Focus-Group Study on Young Women's Needs and Perspectives on Breast Cancer Educational Material.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2024
    Article
  4. Patient-Directed Vasectomy Information: How Readable Is It?The world journal of men's health · 2024
    Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Lydia Rosa BourdacheFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, 3605 Rue de La Montagne, Montreal, QC, H3G 2M1, Canada.
Lydia Ould BrahimIngram School of Nursing, McGill University, 680 Sherbrooke West, Montreal, QC, H3A 2M7, Canada.
Sydney WassermanIngram School of Nursing, McGill University, 680 Sherbrooke West, Montreal, QC, H3A 2M7, Canada.
Marrah Nicolas-JosephIngram School of Nursing, McGill University, 680 Sherbrooke West, Montreal, QC, H3A 2M7, Canada.
Francesca Y E FratiSchulich Library of Physical Sciences, Life Sciences, and Engineering, McGill University, 809 Sherbrooke West, QC, H3A 0C1, Montreal, Canada.
Eric BelzileSt. Mary's Research Centre, 3830 Lacombe Ave, Montreal, QC, H3T 1M5, Canada.
Sylvie D LambertIngram School of Nursing, McGill University, 680 Sherbrooke West, Montreal, QC, H3A 2M7, Canada. sylvie.lambert@mcgill.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the quality, readability, suitability, and usefulness of resources publicly available to adult cancer survivors (aged 18 +) who have completed primary treatment.

methodsResources were identified in July 2021 through Google. Search completeness was verified using Yahoo, Bing, and MedlinePlus. Retrieved resources were assessed for quality using the DISCERN, readability, suitability using the Suitability Assessment Measure (SAM), and usefulness based on a list of unmet needs and self-management skills derived from the literature. Descriptive analyses were conducted, and a cluster analysis identified the highest-scoring resources.

resultsForty-five resources were included. The mean DISCERN score was fair at 63.3% (SD 13.7%) with low-rated items being sources, publication date, and risks and mechanisms of treatment. The mean reading grade level was 11.19 (SD 1.61, range 8-16) with only one resource scoring an 8. The mean SAM score was in the adequate range at 48.2% (SD 10.6%), with graphics being the lowest-rated section. On average, included resources addressed 57.7% (SD 27.3%) of the unmet needs and 48.4% (SD 20.9%) of the self-management skills, the least addressed being problem-solving.

conclusionQuality and suitability were fair, whereas readability exceeded recommended levels. Only one resource had a superior score in both quality and suitability. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The most pressing need is to develop resources for cancer survivors that address their unmet needs and are accessible in terms of literacy. Study findings outline the highest-scoring resources currently available to survivors, families, and clinicians.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsHealth LiteracyNeoplasmsAdultComprehensionHumansInternetCancerConsumer health informationOncologyPatient educationPsycho-oncology; Self-management

Identifiers

PMID36626094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.