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.

Non-medical prescription opioid use and in-hospital illicit drug use among people who use drugs.

INTRODUCTION: Illicit drug use while admitted to hospital is common amongst people who use drugs. Furthermore, non-medical prescription opioid use (NMPOU) is increasingly being used by this population. This study was undertaken to investigate the relationship between NMPOU and having ever reported using illicit drugs in the hospital. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional study design based on data derived from participants enrolled in three Canadian prospective cohort studies between December 2011 and November 2016. Using bivariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses, we examined the relationship between NMPOU and having ever reported illicit drug use in the hospital. RESULTS: Among the 1865 participants (951 male, 471 female) enrolled in the studies, 1422 (76.25%) met the inclusion criteria of having ever been hospitalised. Of these, 436 (30.7%) had used illicit drugs while in the hospital. In multivariable analyses, after adjusting for various confounders, we found a positive relationship between the percentage of reporting at least daily NMPOU in the past 6 months during the cohort study period and illicit drug use in the hospital (adjusted odds ratio 3.42; 95% confidence interval 1.46-8.02). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Among our sample, more persistent NMPOU was positively associated with having reported in-hospital illicit drug use. Our findings point to the need for better identification and management of opioid use disorder in acute care settings to reduce in-hospital illicit drug use, and to offer evidence-based medical treatments to achieve the most optimal outcomes for patients.