Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39378429›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024

Selling Misleading "Cancer Cure" Books on Amazon: Systematic Search on Amazon.com and Thematic Analysis.

Marco Zenone, May van Schalkwyk, Greg Hartwell, Timothy Caulfield, Nason Maani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Marco ZenoneFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4201-6070
May van SchalkwykFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2210-2289
Greg HartwellFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9153-7126
Timothy CaulfieldHealth Law Institute, Faculty of Law, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5471-6184
Nason MaaniGlobal Health Policy Unit, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3398-0688

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile the evidence base on web-based cancer misinformation continues to develop, relatively little is known about the extent of such information on the world's largest e-commerce website, Amazon. Multiple media reports indicate that Amazon may host on its platform questionable cancer-related products for sale, such as books on purported cancer cures. This context suggests an urgent need to evaluate Amazon.com for cancer misinformation.

objectiveThis study sought to (1) examine to what extent are misleading cancer cure books for sale on Amazon.com and (2) determine how cancer cure books on Amazon.com provide misleading cancer information.

methodsWe searched "cancer cure" on Amazon.com and retrieved the top 1000 English-language book search results. We reviewed the books' descriptions and titles to determine whether the books provided misleading cancer cure or treatment information. We considered a book to be misleading if it suggested scientifically unsupported cancer treatment approaches to cure or meaningfully treat cancer. Among books coded as misleading, we conducted an inductive latent thematic analysis to determine the informational value the books sought to offer.

resultsNearly half (494/1000, 49.4%) of the sampled "cancer cure" books for sale on Amazon.com appeared to contain misleading cancer treatment and cure information. Overall, 17 (51.5%) out of 33 Amazon.com results pages had 50% or more of the books coded as misleading. The first search result page had the highest percentage of misleading books (23/33, 69.7%). Misleading books (n=494) contained eight themes: (1) claims of efficacious cancer cure strategies (n=451, 91.3%), (2) oversimplifying cancer and cancer treatment (n=194, 39.3%), (3) falsely justifying ineffective treatments as science based (n=189, 38.3%), (4) discrediting conventional cancer treatments (n=169, 34.2%), (5) finding the true cause of cancer (n=133, 26.9%), (6) homogenizing cancer (n=132, 26.7%), (7) discovery of new cancer treatments (n=119, 24.1%), and (8) cancer cure suppression (n=82, 16.6%).

conclusionsThe results demonstrate that misleading cancer cure books are for sale, visible, and prevalent on Amazon.com, with prominence in initial search hits. These misleading books for sale on Amazon can be conceived of as forming part of a wider, cross-platform, web-based information environment in which misleading cancer cures are often given prominence. Our results suggest that greater enforcement is needed from Amazon and that cancer-focused organizations should engage in preemptive misinformation debunking.

Indexed as

BooksNeoplasmsHumansInternetAmazoncancercancer curecancer informationcancer misinformationcancer treatmente-commercemisinformationmisleadingonline informationthematic analysistreatment

Identifiers

PMID39378429
PMCPMC11496910

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.