Evaluation of quality, readability, suitability, and usefulness of online resources available to cancer survivors

"The Materials Didn't Really Seem to Apply to Me": A Focus-Group Study on Young Women's Needs and Perspectives on Breast Cancer Educational Material

Young women breast cancer survivors face unique challenges in navigating diagnosis and treatment information while also navigating their own life demands (i.e., fertility, childcare, careers). Special consideration to printed and online cancer educational materials distributed to young women should be evaluated for their suitability, but few studies have investigated the educational preferences and needs of young women cancer survivors. We sought to explore young women breast cancer survivors' needs and preferences regarding cancer educational material from diagnosis to survivorship. We used a qualitative design with convenience sampling of young women breast cancer survivors who completed active treatment at a medical center within the last 5 years to participate in semi-structured online focus groups from November 2020 to May 2021. Thirty-three young women (75.8% White, 12.1% Black, 12.1% other) participated in one of seven online focus groups, each lasting approximately 2 h. Four dominant themes emerged from the data: (1) initial interaction with online materials; (2) reasons for seeking printed and online materials; (3) disconnection of visuals; and (4) recommendations. Our findings revealed that young women were initially hesitant to seek online information, but later sought printed and online information after specific endorsement of materials. Current breast cancer materials lack content specific to young women's needs (i.e., reconstruction options), and graphics have little age and racial diversity. Oncology nurses may consider novel methods of education delivery, such as short videos to be shared easily on social media for specific content like scarring results and reconstruction options.

Patient-Directed Vasectomy Information: How Readable Is It?

PURPOSE

To assess the quality and readability of online health information on vasectomy using validated readability and quality assessment tools.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The top 50 search results for "vasectomy" on Google, Bing, and Yahoo were selected. Duplicate links, advertisements, blog posts, paid webpages, and information intended for healthcare providers were excluded. Flesch Reading Ease score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade level, Gunning Fog Index, and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) index were used to assess readability, with optimal readability level for online health information established as being at sixth grade reading level. DISCERN Instrument and JAMA Benchmark were used to assess the quality of selected webpages. Inter-assessment score correlation and results by webpage type were analyzed.

RESULTS

We analyzed 44 webpages, including 16 academic, 5 hospital-affiliated, 6 commercial, 13 non-profit health advocacy, and 4 uncategorized sources. The average readability of the evaluated webpages was at a 10th grade reading level as measured by the Flesch Kincaid Assessment tool, and an undergraduate reading level per the SMOG and Gunning Fog indices. Non-profit health advocacy webpages had the best reading level but still was not at the recommended level of grade 6 to 7. The overall DISCERN quality of the webpages was "fair", with non-profit health advocacy pages performing best.

CONCLUSIONS

The assessed webpages offer education on vasectomy in a language that is too complex for the general population to understand. Furthermore, several sources for online health information, such as non-profits, outperformed webpages by academic institutions. Increased healthcare collaboration and dedication to producing quality online patient resources is necessary to address these shortcomings and build trust among patients to increase utilization of vasectomy and decrease decisional regret.

The Evaluation of the Suitability, Quality, and Readability of Publicly Available Online Resources for the Self-Management of Fear of Cancer Recurrence

Cancer survivors often rely on the internet for health information, which has varying levels of readability, suitability, and quality. There is a need for high-quality online self-management resources for cancer survivors with fear of cancer recurrence (FCR). This study evaluated the readability, suitability, and quality of publicly available online FCR self-management resources. A Google search using FCR-related keywords identified freely available FCR self-management resources for cancer survivors in English. Resource readability (reading grade level), suitability, and quality were evaluated using relevant assessment tools. Descriptive statistics and cluster analysis identified resources with higher suitability and quality scores. Mean resource (n = 23) readability score was grade 11 (SD = 1.6, Range = 9-14). The mean suitability score was 56.0% (SD = 11.4%, Range = 31.0-76.3%), indicating average suitability and the mean quality score was 53% (SD = 11.7%, Range = 27-80%), indicating fair quality. A cluster of 15 (65%) resources with higher suitability and quality scores was identified. There were no significant associations between suitability or quality scores and the type of organisation that published the resources. Online FCR self-management resources varied in readability, suitability and quality. Resources with higher quality and suitability scores relative to other resources are identified for use by healthcare professionals and cancer survivors. Resources that are more culturally appropriate, with lower reading grade levels and detailed self-management strategies are needed.