Jordan G Bruce1, Jennifer L Tucholka2, Nicole M Steffens2, Heather B Neuman1,2,3. 1. School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. 2. Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Surgical Outcomes Research Program, Madison, Wisconsin. 3. Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer patients commonly use the internet as an information resource. Our objective was to evaluate the quality of online information available to support patients facing a decision for breast surgery. METHODS: Breast cancer surgery-related queries were performed (Google and Bing), and reviewed for content pertinent to breast cancer surgery. The DISCERN instrument was used to evaluate websites' structural components that influence publication reliability and ability of information to support treatment decision-making. Scores of 4/5 were considered "good." RESULTS: 45 unique websites were identified. Websites satisfied a median 5/9 content questions. Commonly omitted topics included: having a choice between breast conservation and mastectomy (67%) and potential for 2nd surgery to obtain negative margins after breast conservation (60%). Websites had a median DISCERN score of 2.9 (range 2.0-4.5). Websites achieved higher scores on structural criteria (median 3.6 [2.1-4.7]), with 24% rated as "good." Scores on supporting decision-making questions were lower (2.6 [1.3-4.4]), with only 7% scoring "good." CONCLUSION: Although numerous breast cancer-related websites exist, most do a poor job providing women with essential information necessary to actively participate in decision-making for breast cancer surgery. Providing easily- accessible, high-quality online information has the potential to significantly improve patients' experiences with decision-making.
BACKGROUND:Breast cancerpatients commonly use the internet as an information resource. Our objective was to evaluate the quality of online information available to support patients facing a decision for breast surgery. METHODS:Breast cancer surgery-related queries were performed (Google and Bing), and reviewed for content pertinent to breast cancer surgery. The DISCERN instrument was used to evaluate websites' structural components that influence publication reliability and ability of information to support treatment decision-making. Scores of 4/5 were considered "good." RESULTS: 45 unique websites were identified. Websites satisfied a median 5/9 content questions. Commonly omitted topics included: having a choice between breast conservation and mastectomy (67%) and potential for 2nd surgery to obtain negative margins after breast conservation (60%). Websites had a median DISCERN score of 2.9 (range 2.0-4.5). Websites achieved higher scores on structural criteria (median 3.6 [2.1-4.7]), with 24% rated as "good." Scores on supporting decision-making questions were lower (2.6 [1.3-4.4]), with only 7% scoring "good." CONCLUSION: Although numerous breast cancer-related websites exist, most do a poor job providing women with essential information necessary to actively participate in decision-making for breast cancer surgery. Providing easily- accessible, high-quality online information has the potential to significantly improve patients' experiences with decision-making.
Authors: Clara N Lee; Rosalie Dominik; Carrie A Levin; Michael J Barry; Carol Cosenza; Annette M O'Connor; Albert G Mulley; Karen R Sepucha Journal: Health Expect Date: 2010-06-09 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Diane Valade; Catherine Orlowski; Catherine Draus; Barbara Nabozny-Valerio; Susan Keiser Journal: Health Expect Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Bradford W Hesse; Anna Gaysynsky; Allison Ottenbacher; Richard P Moser; Kelly D Blake; Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou; Sana Vieux; Ellen Beckjord Journal: J Health Commun Date: 2014-12
Authors: Ian D Graham; Jo Logan; Annette O'Connor; Karen E Weeks; Shawn Aaron; Ann Cranney; Robert Dales; Thomas Elmslie; Paul Hebert; Elaine Jolly; Andreas Laupacis; Susan Mitchell; Peter Tugwell Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2003-07
Authors: Jordan G Bruce; Jennifer L Tucholka; Nicole M Steffens; Jane E Mahoney; Heather B Neuman Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Trista J Stankowski-Drengler; Jennifer L Tucholka; Jordan G Bruce; Nicole M Steffens; Jessica R Schumacher; Caprice C Greenberg; Lee G Wilke; Bret Hanlon; Jennifer Steiman; Heather B Neuman Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Jennifer L Tucholka; Dou-Yan Yang; Jordan G Bruce; Nicole M Steffens; Jessica R Schumacher; Caprice C Greenberg; Lee G Wilke; Jennifer Steiman; Heather B Neuman Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2017-12-12 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Yan Li; Shan Ye; Yidong Zhou; Feng Mao; Hailing Guo; Yan Lin; Xiaohui Zhang; Songjie Shen; Na Shi; Xiaojie Wang; Qiang Sun Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-04-17 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Bach Xuan Tran; Tracy Vo; Anh Kim Dang; Quang Nhat Nguyen; Cuong Tat Nguyen; Chi Linh Hoang; Khanh Nam Do; Carl A Latkin; Cyrus S H Ho; Roger C M Ho Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-11-05 Impact factor: 3.390