Malignant websites? Analyzing the quality of prostate cancer education web resources

Authors

  • Kevin Kobes Undergraduate Medical Program, Faculty of Medicine University of British Columbia
  • Ilene B. Harris Department of Medical Education University of Illinois College of Medicine
  • Glenn Regehr Department of Surgery and Centre for Health Education Scholarship, University of British Columbia
  • Ara Tekian Department of Medical Education University of Illinois College of Medicine
  • Paris-Ann Ingledew Radiation Oncology, B.C. Cancer- Vancouver Center Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1912-3276

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.5084

Abstract

Introduction: Prostate cancer patients are using more web resources to inform themselves about their cancer. However, patients may receive out-of-date or inaccurate information due to lack of regulation. The current study looks to systematically analyze the quality of websites accessed by patients with prostate cancer.

Methods: The term “prostate cancer” was searched in Google and the metasearch engines, Yippy and Dogpile, and the top 100 hits related to patient information were compiled from over 32 million hits. A standardized tool was used to examine 100 sites with respect to attribution, currency, usability, and content.

Results: Of the top 100 websites relating to prostate cancer information, only 27% identified an author, of which 16% had their credentials displayed. The majority of websites disclosed ownership (97%). Over half of the websites did not include the date of the last update and of those that did, only 66% were current within two years. According to the Flesch Kincaid grade level tool for readability, the majority (87%) of sites were found to be at a high school level, while 6% were at university level. Finally, content varied among websites; 90% of sites provided information on detection and workup and treatments, but only 14% of sites included information on prognosis.

Conclusions: The reliability of websites presenting prostate cancer information is questionable. There were noted deficiencies in attribution, currency, and readability. While information on detection and treatment is well-covered, information related to prognosis is lacking.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2018-05-25

How to Cite

Kobes, K., Harris, I. B., Regehr, G., Tekian, A., & Ingledew, P.-A. (2018). Malignant websites? Analyzing the quality of prostate cancer education web resources. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 12(10). https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.5084

Issue

Vol. 12 No. 10 (2018): CUAJ October

Section

Original Research

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.