Quality Assessment of Online Resources for the Most Common Cancers.

The internet is a common source of health information for patients with cancer. Despite research surrounding the quality of online resources for individual types of cancer, these results may not necessarily be easily extrapolated to cancer resources as a whole. Thus, we aim to use a standardized tool to produce generalizable results by analyzing the quality of online resources for the most common cancers. Educational websites pertaining to breast, lung, prostate, and colorectal cancers were searched using multiple search engines. After screening against pre-specified inclusion criteria, the most visible 100 websites for each cancer were extracted for analysis. A validated tool was then used to assess their quality. Pooled results were evaluated using descriptive and inferential statistics. Of the 400 analyzed websites, 43% were commercially affiliated, and these were significantly associated with greater use of biased language. Thirty percent of websites disclosed authorship, 47% cited at least one reliable source, and 43% were updated within the last 2 years. The average Flesch-Kincaid readability was determined to be at a grade 10.9 level, which is significantly more difficult than the recommended grade 6 level. Risk factors, symptoms, and detection were the most accurately covered topics. However, most websites did not cover prognosis. This study comprehensively examines the quality of online cancer resources for the four most common cancers. Our results could help guide the development of future resources, support patient education endeavors, and raise awareness among healthcare providers about the limitations of online cancer resources.

Quality Analysis of Online Patient Resources for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

GOAL: This study aims to evaluate the quality of online hepatocellular carcinoma (primary liver cancer) resources by using a validated tool to determine the strengths and limitations of hepatocellular carcinoma Web sites designed for patient education. BACKGROUND: In recent years, online health information-seeking behavior has become more prevalent. Meanwhile, hepatocellular carcinoma incidence rates have also increased. However, there is currently limited literature assessing the quality of online hepatocellular carcinoma information. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The term "hepatocellular carcinoma" was searched using the search engine Google and the meta-search engines Dogpile and Yippy. A validated rating tool was used to assign quality scores to 100 Web sites based on the domains of Web site affiliation, accountability, interactivity, structure and organization, readability, and content quality. Overall quality scores were tallied for all Web sites. RESULTS: Noncommercial hepatocellular carcinoma Web sites received significantly higher overall quality scores compared with their commercial counterparts. Overall, 30% of the Web sites identified their author(s), 42% cited sources, and 33% were updated within the past 2 years. The majority of Web sites utilized at least 1 interactive feature and 4 structural tools. Average readability was at a grade 11.8 level using the Flesch-Kincaid grading system, which is significantly higher than the recommended grade 6 level. Definition and treatment were the most commonly covered topics, while prevention and prognosis were the least commonly covered. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of online hepatocellular carcinoma information is highly variable. Health care professionals should be aware of its limitations and be proactive in guiding patients to reliable resources.

Characteristics Assessment of Online YouTube Videos on Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer.

Introduction The internet has become a mainstay source of health information for cancer patients. Online patient education videos are common; however, there have been no studies examining the quality of publicly available videos on radiotherapy for lung cancer (one of the most common forms of cancer). To fill this knowledge gap, we aim to systematically map and objectively assess videos discussing radiotherapy for lung cancer on YouTube. Methods The terms "radiotherapy for lung cancer," "radiation for lung cancer," "radiation therapy for lung cancer," and "radiation treatment for lung cancer" were searched on YouTube using a clear-cache browser. Results were sorted by relevance and the top 50 English-language results for each search were recorded. After removing duplicates, each video was assessed for length, Video Power Index (VPI, which is the product of a video's average daily views and like and dislike ratio), source, content, comment moderation, and misinformation. Two raters were used to ensure consistency. Results were evaluated using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results A total of 88 unique videos resulted from the search. The median video length was 4 minutes and 5 seconds. The average VPI was 10.9 (95% CI: 1.5-20.4) and the median number of views was 954.5. All videos were published between July 8, 2009 and November 18, 2020. Of the videos, 44% were published within the past two years. A total of 61% of the videos were from the USA, 14% were from the UK, 6% from Australia, 5% each from Canada and India, and other countries make up the remaining 10%. Most of the videos were published by healthcare facilities (39%) and non-profit organizations (31%). Content-wise, 95% of videos contain information specific to lung cancer. A total of 46 videos (52%) were targeted toward patient education. Of which, 37 covered radiotherapy for lung cancer, 12 covered side effects for radiotherapy, and 11 covered both. The other 42 videos (48%) were designed for a professional audience. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)/stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) was the most commonly described radiotherapy modality (42%), and the physician interview was the most common format, being used in 59% of videos. Out of the 38 videos with at least one comment, only two (5%) were moderated by the host channel. None of the videos featured misleading information. Conclusions This study comprehensively surveyed YouTube videos pertaining to radiotherapy for lung cancer to provide a high-level overview of the information that patients may find online. Although nearly half of the videos describe lung cancer radiotherapy for patients, only a small proportion comprehensively cover both radiotherapy and its side effects. The results of our study can help guide the development of patient education tools and encourage healthcare providers to recognize the limitations of online health information and proactively address patient questions regarding radiotherapy. Future research could examine videos on other lung cancer treatment options or radiotherapy for other cancers.