Quality of Online Information for Esophageal Cancer.

The Internet is a readily available source of information, and patients in North America frequently access it. Esophageal cancer is the 7th most common cancer worldwide, but there is a lack of studies examining esophageal cancer website quality. This current study looks to systematically analyze the quality of websites accessed by patients with esophageal cancer. A previously validated website evaluation tool was used to analyze the quality of online esophageal cancer resources for patients. The term "esophagus cancer" was used to retrieve hits from the search engine Google and the meta-search engines Dogpile and Yippy. A 100 website list was compiled using pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Websites were evaluated regarding administration, accountability, authorship, organization, readability, content, and accuracy. The term "esophagus cancer" returned over 500 websites from the search engines. Of the 100 websites included for analysis, 97% disclosed ownership, sponsorship, and advertising. Only 35% identified an author and even fewer (31%) gave the author's credentials. Only 31% declared updates to their information within the past 2 years. Readability scores revealed only 9%, and 12% of sites scored at an elementary level, according to the Flesch-Kincaid (FK) and SMOG scoring scales, respectively. The average FK and SMOG scores were 12.6 and 11.0, respectively. Detection was the most accurately described (70%). However, few websites provided accurate incidence/prevalence (28%), stage-specific prognosis (27%), or preventative information (17%). The quality of websites offering information on esophageal cancer is variable. While they overwhelmingly disclose website ownership interests, most do not identify authors, poorly describe important domains of esophageal cancer, and overall readability exceeds the commonly accepted level for non-healthcare professionals.