1
|
Gootzen TA, Kalra A, Sarig K, Sobočan M, Oxley SG, Dworschak N, Georgiannakis A, Glynou S, Taniskidi A, Ganesan S, Ferris M, Legood R, Eeles R, Evans DGR, Fierheller CT, Manchanda R. Online Provision of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Health Information: A Search Engine Driven Systematic Web-Based Analysis. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:2324. [PMID: 39001386 PMCID: PMC11240379 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16132324] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2024] [Revised: 06/23/2024] [Accepted: 06/24/2024] [Indexed: 07/16/2024] Open
Abstract
BRCA genetic testing is available for UK Jewish individuals but the provision of information online for BRCA is unknown. We aimed to evaluate online provision of BRCA information by UK organisations (UKO), UK Jewish community organisations (JCO), and genetic testing providers (GTP). Google searches for organisations offering BRCA information were performed using relevant sets of keywords. The first 100 website links were categorised into UKOs/JCOs/GTPs; additional JCOs were supplemented through community experts. Websites were reviewed using customised questionnaires for BRCA information. Information provision was assessed for five domains: accessibility, scope, depth, accuracy, and quality. These domains were combined to provide a composite score (maximum score = 5). Results were screened (n = 6856) and 45 UKOs, 16 JCOs, and 18 GTPs provided BRCA information. Accessibility was high (84%,66/79). Scope was lacking with 35% (28/79) addressing >50% items. Most (82%, 65/79) described BRCA-associated cancers: breast and/or ovarian cancer was mentioned by 78%(62/79), but only 34% (27/79) mentioned ≥1 pancreatic, prostate, melanoma. Few websites provided carrier frequencies in the general (24%,19/79) and Jewish populations (20%,16/79). Only 15% (12/79) had quality information with some/minimal shortcomings. Overall information provision was low-to-moderate: median scores UKO = 2.1 (IQR = 1), JCO = 1.6 (IQR = 0.9), and GTP = 2.3 (IQR = 1) (maximum-score = 5). There is a scarcity of high-quality BRCA information online. These findings have implications for UK Jewish BRCA programmes and those considering BRCA testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tamar A Gootzen
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention & Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Charterhouse Square, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Ashwin Kalra
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention & Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Charterhouse Square, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London E1 1BB, UK
| | - Katrina Sarig
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention & Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Charterhouse Square, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Monika Sobočan
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention & Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Charterhouse Square, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Maribor, Taborksa ul, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia
| | - Samuel George Oxley
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention & Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Charterhouse Square, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London E1 1BB, UK
| | - Nina Dworschak
- Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London E1 2AD, UK
| | - Ariadni Georgiannakis
- Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London E1 2AD, UK
| | - Sevasti Glynou
- Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London E1 2AD, UK
| | - Angeliki Taniskidi
- Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London E1 2AD, UK
| | - Subhasheenee Ganesan
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention & Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Charterhouse Square, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London E1 1BB, UK
| | | | - Rosa Legood
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK
| | - Ros Eeles
- The Institute of Cancer Research, and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London SM2 5PT, UK
| | - D Gareth R Evans
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Division of Evolution, Infection and Genomic Sciences, University of Manchester, MAHSC, 6th Floor Saint Mary's Hospital, Manchester M13 9WL, UK
| | - Caitlin T Fierheller
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention & Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Charterhouse Square, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention & Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Charterhouse Square, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London E1 1BB, UK
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London WC1V 6LJ, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Parmar GS, Das S, Ingledew PA. Quality of Online Information for Esophageal Cancer. JOURNAL OF CANCER EDUCATION : THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANCER EDUCATION 2023; 38:863-869. [PMID: 35854205 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-022-02198-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/04/2022] [Indexed: 06/02/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gurjit S Parmar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, BC Cancer Agency-Vancouver Center, 600 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia, V5Z 4E6, Canada
| | - Samarpita Das
- Department of Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine, University of Toronto, 12th Floor, 123 Edward Street, Toronto, ON, M5G 1E2, Canada
| | - Paris-Ann Ingledew
- Department of Radiation Oncology, BC Cancer Agency-Vancouver Center, 600 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia, V5Z 4E6, Canada.
- Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 2775 Laurel Street, 11th Floor, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Vicente EP, de Faria SEE, Almeida ABL, Yamada PA, Lucena TFR, Silva TMG, Bernuci MP. Cervical Cancer Prevention on Instagram: Content and Social Interaction Analysis of Brazilian Accounts. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2022; 23:3043-3049. [PMID: 36172667 PMCID: PMC9810299 DOI: 10.31557/apjcp.2022.23.9.3043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2022] [Accepted: 09/17/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of the present study was to analyse the content of posts on Instagram about cervical cancer. METHODS It was conducted a qualitative analysis using the 50 most popular publicly available Portuguese-language Instagram posts, containing the hashtags #cervicalcancer, #papsmear, #hpv, #papillomavirus, and #hpvvac-cine, during the Brazilian national cervical cancer prevention campaign in March 2018. RESULTS Posts recruited using #cervicalcancer provided 60% of posts with contents related to secondary prevention; the #papsmear provided 46% of posts with irrelevant contents; the #hpv and #papillomavirus provided 50% and 64% of posts with informative content, respectively; and the #hpvvaccine provided 58% of posts with content related to primary prevention. The posts that received the highest number of likes were those from the hashtags #hpv and #papillomavirus with 151.33 and 78.00 likes/post, respectively. The majority of posts presented less than 05 comments/post, except for the #hpv, which had 64.76 comments/post. According to the users' profiles, the majority of the posts, regardless of the hashtag used, were made by health professionals. CONCLUSION The focus of Instagram posts about cervical cancer is on secondary prevention, which can contribute to the promotion of health behaviours not directed to aspects of primary prevention of the disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elen P Vicente
- Postgraduate Program in Health Promotion, Universidade Cesumar, Brazil.
| | | | | | | | - Tiago FR Lucena
- Faculty of Communication and Multimedia, State University of Maringá, Brazil.
| | - Tania MG Silva
- Postgraduate Program in Health Promotion, Universidade Cesumar, Brazil.
- Cesumar Institute of Science, Technology and Innovation, Brazil.
| | - Marcelo Picinin Bernuci
- Postgraduate Program in Health Promotion, Universidade Cesumar, Brazil.
- Cesumar Institute of Science, Technology and Innovation, Brazil.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Killow V, Lin J, Ingledew PA. The Past and Present of Breast Cancer Resources: A Re-evaluation of the Quality of Online Resources After Eight Years. Cureus 2022; 14:e28120. [PMID: 36134068 PMCID: PMC9481420 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.28120] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Background and objective The internet has become a major resource of information for cancer patients. However, the quality of these resources is variable, and a better understanding is needed to guide physicians as to how to best support patients in their online searches. We previously evaluated the quality of online breast cancer resources in 2011. Nearly a decade later, we aimed to assess the present quality of online breast cancer-related information and to compare our current analysis with data collected in 2011. Methods A list of 100 breast cancer websites was systematically compiled using meta-search engines Yippy and Dogpile and the search engine Google using the search term “breast cancer”. Content accuracy and quality markers, including authorship, attribution, currency, site organization, and readability were assessed by using a previously validated standardized rating tool. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Fisher’s exact test. The same strategy was used in both 2011 and 2019. Results When comparing 2011 data to the current one, 27% of websites had been updated in the previous two years in 2011 compared to 65% in 2019 (p<0.00001). Both data sets remained similar in terms of website disclosures and objectivity. Only 30% of websites analyzed in 2019 used two or more reliable sources, while 63% had no reliable sources or no sources cited. From 2011 to 2019, resources with readability above grade 12 increased from 4% to 30% (p<0.0001), while websites offering educational support rose from 8% to 35% (p<0.0001). In 2019, treatment and etiology/risk factors were the most accurately covered areas (64% and 63% of websites, respectively). In 2011, 63% of websites were found to be globally accurate. Prognosis coverage increased from 18% to 33% from 2011 to 2019 (p=0.02). In 2019, survivorship was also evaluated and found to be covered in only 24% of resources. Conclusion Over the past eight years, there have been variable changes in the quality of online breast cancer resources. Promisingly, websites are being updated more frequently and the educational support offered is expanding. Furthermore, there has been significant improvement in the coverage of prognosis, although this requires further progress. Unfortunately, websites are becoming increasingly challenging to understand for the average patient, and coverage of survivorship is lacking. Our study provides vital information to healthcare providers on these trends in online breast cancer resources and how to best support patients in their internet searches.
Collapse
|