BACKGROUND: Patients increasingly use the Internet for gastric cancer information. However, the quality of the information is questionable. We evaluated the accuracy, completeness, accessibility, reliability, and readability of gastric cancer websites. METHODS: The Internet was searched for the terms "gastric cancer" or "stomach cancer" using general search engines. Websites were evaluated for completeness (CS) and accuracy (AS) using predefined quality appraisal instruments (QAIs), reliability using an integrity score (IS), readability using the Flesch-Kincaid (FK) grade level, and accessibility using automated accessibility appraisal tools. Site sponsor and the presence of quality labels were noted. RESULTS: Fifty-one websites were evaluated. The mean CS was 100.3 (SD ±44.9), AS was 107.22 (SD ±47.9), IS was 15.3 (SD ±3.7), and the mean readability grade level was 10.4 (SD ±2.5). Only 5 websites had the minimum mandatory basic accessibility. Commercial sites and sites with quality labels had significantly more accessibility violations. CONCLUSIONS: Internet gastric cancer information is overtly commercial, generally incomplete, and poorly accessible. Copyright Â
BACKGROUND:Patients increasingly use the Internet for gastric cancer information. However, the quality of the information is questionable. We evaluated the accuracy, completeness, accessibility, reliability, and readability of gastric cancer websites. METHODS: The Internet was searched for the terms "gastric cancer" or "stomach cancer" using general search engines. Websites were evaluated for completeness (CS) and accuracy (AS) using predefined quality appraisal instruments (QAIs), reliability using an integrity score (IS), readability using the Flesch-Kincaid (FK) grade level, and accessibility using automated accessibility appraisal tools. Site sponsor and the presence of quality labels were noted. RESULTS: Fifty-one websites were evaluated. The mean CS was 100.3 (SD ±44.9), AS was 107.22 (SD ±47.9), IS was 15.3 (SD ±3.7), and the mean readability grade level was 10.4 (SD ±2.5). Only 5 websites had the minimum mandatory basic accessibility. Commercial sites and sites with quality labels had significantly more accessibility violations. CONCLUSIONS: Internet gastric cancer information is overtly commercial, generally incomplete, and poorly accessible. Copyright Â
Authors: Jozette Jc Stienen; Petronella B Ottevanger; Lianne Wennekes; Helena M Dekker; Richard Wm van der Maazen; Caroline Mpw Mandigers; Johan Hjm van Krieken; Nicole Ma Blijlevens; Rosella Pmg Hermens Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2015-01-09