A Vivien1, V Kowalski1, A Chatellier2, E Babin3, H Bénateau4, A Veyssière5. 1. Faculté de médecine de Caen, université de Caen Basse-Normandie, 14032 Caen cedex 5, France. 2. Service de chirurgie maxillo-faciale et plastique, centre hospitalier universitaire de Caen, 14000 Caen, France. 3. Faculté de médecine de Caen, université de Caen Basse-Normandie, 14032 Caen cedex 5, France; Service d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et chirurgie cervico-facial, centre hospitalier universitaire de Caen, 14000 Caen, France. 4. Faculté de médecine de Caen, université de Caen Basse-Normandie, 14032 Caen cedex 5, France; Service de chirurgie maxillo-faciale et plastique, centre hospitalier universitaire de Caen, 14000 Caen, France; Laboratoire EA 4652 microenvironnement cellulaire et pathologies, équipe BioconnecT, université de Caen Basse-Normandie, 14032 Caen cedex 5, France. 5. Faculté de médecine de Caen, université de Caen Basse-Normandie, 14032 Caen cedex 5, France; Service de chirurgie maxillo-faciale et plastique, centre hospitalier universitaire de Caen, 14000 Caen, France; Laboratoire EA 4652 microenvironnement cellulaire et pathologies, équipe BioconnecT, université de Caen Basse-Normandie, 14032 Caen cedex 5, France. Electronic address: alexis.veyssiere@hotmail.fr.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The goal set by the French highest national authorities in the 2014-2019 Cancer Plan is to "heal more sick persons by promoting early diagnosis through screening". Screening requires information. Nowadays, Internet allows for access to information "in one click". The aim of our study was to evaluate the quality of information found on the Internet. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Several sites dedicated to oral cavity cancer screening were selected on Google. The quality of health information found in these sites was evaluated by the DISCERN questionnaire. The quality of decision support provided by the sites was evaluated by the IPDAS checklist. RESULTS: Twenty-seven sites were selected. The average DISCERN score was 25.1/75 (15/75 to 40/75). Eighteen sites (66.6%) had very poor, 8 sites (29.6%) had poor and 1 site had average information quality. IPDAS scores ranged from 11.1 to 38.1. Eight sites (29.6%) had less than 20%, 14 sites (51.9%) had between 20 and 30% and 5 sites (18.5%) had 30% or more validated criteria. No site achieved the pass mark. DISCUSSION: The quality of general public French-speaking website dedicated to oral cancer detection is very bad. The role of health professionals such as general practitioners and head and neck surgeons, remains essential.
INTRODUCTION: The goal set by the French highest national authorities in the 2014-2019 Cancer Plan is to "heal more sick persons by promoting early diagnosis through screening". Screening requires information. Nowadays, Internet allows for access to information "in one click". The aim of our study was to evaluate the quality of information found on the Internet. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Several sites dedicated to oral cavity cancer screening were selected on Google. The quality of health information found in these sites was evaluated by the DISCERN questionnaire. The quality of decision support provided by the sites was evaluated by the IPDAS checklist. RESULTS: Twenty-seven sites were selected. The average DISCERN score was 25.1/75 (15/75 to 40/75). Eighteen sites (66.6%) had very poor, 8 sites (29.6%) had poor and 1 site had average information quality. IPDAS scores ranged from 11.1 to 38.1. Eight sites (29.6%) had less than 20%, 14 sites (51.9%) had between 20 and 30% and 5 sites (18.5%) had 30% or more validated criteria. No site achieved the pass mark. DISCUSSION: The quality of general public French-speaking website dedicated to oral cancer detection is very bad. The role of health professionals such as general practitioners and head and neck surgeons, remains essential.