Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38676385›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2024

Evaluation of online text-based information resources of gynaecological cancer symptoms.

Tracey DiSipio, Cate Scholte, Abbey Diaz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. 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. Article
  2. Information experiences among women diagnosed with endometrial cancer: a mixed methods study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  3. Listening to Australians with ovarian cancer: a cross-sectional survey investigating clinical trials awareness, information access and participation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Tracey DiSipioSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0285-6318
Cate ScholteSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Abbey DiazSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGynaecological cancer symptoms are often vague and non-specific. Quality health information is central to timely cancer diagnosis and treatment. The aim of this study was to identify and evaluate the quality of online text-based patient information resources regarding gynaecological cancer symptoms.

methodsA targeted website search and Google search were conducted to identify health information resources published by the Australian government and non-government health organisations. Resources were classified by topic (gynaecological health, gynaecological cancers, cancer, general health); assessed for reading level (Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, SMOG) and difficulty (Flesch Reading Ease, FRE); understandability and actionability (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool, PEMAT, 0-100), whereby higher scores indicate better understandability/actionability. Seven criteria were used to assess cultural inclusivity specific for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people; resources which met 3-5 items were deemed to be moderately inclusive and 6+ items as inclusive.

resultsA total of 109 resources were identified and 76% provided information on symptoms in the context of gynaecological cancers. The average readability was equivalent to a grade 10 reading level on the SMOG and classified as 'difficult to read' on the FRE. The mean PEMAT scores were 95% (range 58-100) for understandability and 13% (range 0-80) for actionability. Five resources were evaluated as being moderately culturally inclusive. No resource met all the benchmarks.

conclusionsThis study highlights the inadequate quality of online resources available on pre-diagnosis gynaecological cancer symptom information. Resources should be revised in line with the recommended standards for readability, understandability and actionability and to meet the needs of a culturally diverse population.

Indexed as

Genital Neoplasms, FemaleInternetAustraliaComprehensionConsumer Health InformationFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansPatient Education as Topiccultural inclusiongynaecological cancergynaecological symptomshealth literacyindigenous healthinternetpatient information

Identifiers

PMID38676385
PMCPMC11053368

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.