E P Tamm1, B K Raval, P T Huynh. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Texas at Houston Medical School, 77030, USA.
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The Internet offers many advantages for educating patients but has no standards for publication. This limitation could negatively affect patient care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of information on mammography that a patient could find on the Internet. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three search utilities were used to research the term "mammography." For each utility, the first 50 addresses for Web pages were evaluated (or all the addresses, if fewer than 50 were returned). Web sites selected contained information that could guide an asymptomatic woman in deciding whether to undergo screening mammography. These sites were then evaluated for whether they indicated their sponsorship, authorship, the currency of information, and references. Sites were also noted if they advised women older than 50 years to undergo screening mammography at intervals of longer than 1 year or otherwise severely diminished the role of mammography. RESULTS: Thirty-eight Web sites were identified. Ten indicated authorship, 29 indicated the currency of the information, and 27 provided references. All of the Web sites indicated sponsorship. Three sites recommended screening mammography at intervals of longer than 1 year for women 50 years of age or older. Two sites suggested that mammography is not substantially more sensitive than physical examination. CONCLUSION: Many Web sites do not meet the standards for disseminating information required in professional peer-reviewed journals. Some Web sites contain statements that might lead asymptomatic women over age 50 years to delay screening mammography or to undergo screening at intervals of longer than 1 year.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The Internet offers many advantages for educating patients but has no standards for publication. This limitation could negatively affect patient care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of information on mammography that a patient could find on the Internet. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three search utilities were used to research the term "mammography." For each utility, the first 50 addresses for Web pages were evaluated (or all the addresses, if fewer than 50 were returned). Web sites selected contained information that could guide an asymptomatic woman in deciding whether to undergo screening mammography. These sites were then evaluated for whether they indicated their sponsorship, authorship, the currency of information, and references. Sites were also noted if they advised women older than 50 years to undergo screening mammography at intervals of longer than 1 year or otherwise severely diminished the role of mammography. RESULTS: Thirty-eight Web sites were identified. Ten indicated authorship, 29 indicated the currency of the information, and 27 provided references. All of the Web sites indicated sponsorship. Three sites recommended screening mammography at intervals of longer than 1 year for women 50 years of age or older. Two sites suggested that mammography is not substantially more sensitive than physical examination. CONCLUSION: Many Web sites do not meet the standards for disseminating information required in professional peer-reviewed journals. Some Web sites contain statements that might lead asymptomatic women over age 50 years to delay screening mammography or to undergo screening at intervals of longer than 1 year.
Authors: Audie A Atienza; Bradford W Hesse; Timothy B Baker; David B Abrams; Barbara K Rimer; Robert T Croyle; Lindsey N Volckmann Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 5.043