BACKGROUND: The internet is an easy and always accessible source of information for cancer patients. The aim of our study was to evaluate the information provided on German websites. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We developed an instrument based on criteria for patient information from the German Network for Evidence-based Medicine, the Agency for Quality in Medicine, HONcode, DISCERN, and the afgis. We simulated a patient's search and derived the websites for evaluation. We analyzed the visibility of each website and evaluated the websites using the developed instrument. RESULTS: We analyzed 77 websites. The highest visibility index was shown by 4 profit websites. Websites from professional societies and self-help groups have low rankings. Concerning quality, websites from non-profit providers and self-help groups are on top. Websites with a profit interest have the lowest average score. CONCLUSIONS: A discrepancy exists between the visibility and the quality of the analyzed websites. With the internet becoming an important source of information on cancer treatments for patients, this may lead to false information and wrong decisions. We provide a list of suggestions as to how this risk may be reduced by complementary information from the physician and from trustworthy websites.
BACKGROUND: The internet is an easy and always accessible source of information for cancerpatients. The aim of our study was to evaluate the information provided on German websites. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We developed an instrument based on criteria for patient information from the German Network for Evidence-based Medicine, the Agency for Quality in Medicine, HONcode, DISCERN, and the afgis. We simulated a patient's search and derived the websites for evaluation. We analyzed the visibility of each website and evaluated the websites using the developed instrument. RESULTS: We analyzed 77 websites. The highest visibility index was shown by 4 profit websites. Websites from professional societies and self-help groups have low rankings. Concerning quality, websites from non-profit providers and self-help groups are on top. Websites with a profit interest have the lowest average score. CONCLUSIONS: A discrepancy exists between the visibility and the quality of the analyzed websites. With the internet becoming an important source of information on cancer treatments for patients, this may lead to false information and wrong decisions. We provide a list of suggestions as to how this risk may be reduced by complementary information from the physician and from trustworthy websites.
Authors: C Keinki; E Seilacher; M Ebel; D Ruetters; I Kessler; J Stellamanns; I Rudolph; J Huebner Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Ralph Muecke; Magdalena Paul; Christina Conrad; Christoph Stoll; Karsten Muenstedt; Oliver Micke; Franz J Prott; Jens Buentzel; Jutta Huebner Journal: Integr Cancer Ther Date: 2015-07-26 Impact factor: 3.279
Authors: Christian Keinki; Richard Zowalla; Martin Wiesner; Marie Jolin Koester; Jutta Huebner Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 2.037