Cargando…

Assessment of the quality of patient-oriented information over internet on testicular cancer

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the quality and readability of patient education information available on the internet on testicular cancer. METHODS: Internet searches were performed using the keywords ‘testicular cancer’, ‘testicular tumour’, ‘testicular tumor’, ‘testicular malignancy’, ‘ger...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Prasanth, Anton S., Jayarajah, Umesh, Mohanappirian, Ranganathan, Seneviratne, Sanjeewa A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5930418/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29716564
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4436-0
_version_ 1783319488730497024
author Prasanth, Anton S.
Jayarajah, Umesh
Mohanappirian, Ranganathan
Seneviratne, Sanjeewa A.
author_facet Prasanth, Anton S.
Jayarajah, Umesh
Mohanappirian, Ranganathan
Seneviratne, Sanjeewa A.
author_sort Prasanth, Anton S.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the quality and readability of patient education information available on the internet on testicular cancer. METHODS: Internet searches were performed using the keywords ‘testicular cancer’, ‘testicular tumour’, ‘testicular tumor’, ‘testicular malignancy’, ‘germ cell tumour’ and ‘germ cell tumor’ using Google, Yahoo! And Bing search engines with default settings. The first 50 web links appeared in each search engine were evaluated for their readability by using the validated Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) while accessibility, usability and reliability were assessed using the LIDA tool. The quality was assessed using DISCERN instrument. Non-parametric tests were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 900 websites were assessed and 62 websites were included in the analysis. Twenty two (22) websites (35.5%) were certified by Health on the Net Foundation code of conduct (HON code). The majority (n = 57, 91.9%) were non-governmental websites. The median FRES score was 51.6 (range: 28.1–74.1), the overall median LIDA score was 115 (range: 81–147); accessibility 55 (range: 46–61), reliability 22 (range: 8–45) and usability 38.5 (range: 21–50), while the median DISCERN score was 43.5 (range: 16–69). The DISCERN score was significantly associated with the overall LIDA score and usability and reliability components of the LIDA score (p < 0.001). However, no significant associations were observed between readability and accessibility. A significant correlation was noted between usability and reliability components of the LIDA score (Spearman’s rho: 0.789, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this study, the readability, reliability and quality scores of most websites were found to be suboptimal and hence, there is potential for improvement. As the internet is expanding rapidly as a readily available source of information to the public, it is essential to implement steps to ensure that highest quality information is provided without any commercial motivation or bias.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5930418
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59304182018-05-09 Assessment of the quality of patient-oriented information over internet on testicular cancer Prasanth, Anton S. Jayarajah, Umesh Mohanappirian, Ranganathan Seneviratne, Sanjeewa A. BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the quality and readability of patient education information available on the internet on testicular cancer. METHODS: Internet searches were performed using the keywords ‘testicular cancer’, ‘testicular tumour’, ‘testicular tumor’, ‘testicular malignancy’, ‘germ cell tumour’ and ‘germ cell tumor’ using Google, Yahoo! And Bing search engines with default settings. The first 50 web links appeared in each search engine were evaluated for their readability by using the validated Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) while accessibility, usability and reliability were assessed using the LIDA tool. The quality was assessed using DISCERN instrument. Non-parametric tests were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 900 websites were assessed and 62 websites were included in the analysis. Twenty two (22) websites (35.5%) were certified by Health on the Net Foundation code of conduct (HON code). The majority (n = 57, 91.9%) were non-governmental websites. The median FRES score was 51.6 (range: 28.1–74.1), the overall median LIDA score was 115 (range: 81–147); accessibility 55 (range: 46–61), reliability 22 (range: 8–45) and usability 38.5 (range: 21–50), while the median DISCERN score was 43.5 (range: 16–69). The DISCERN score was significantly associated with the overall LIDA score and usability and reliability components of the LIDA score (p < 0.001). However, no significant associations were observed between readability and accessibility. A significant correlation was noted between usability and reliability components of the LIDA score (Spearman’s rho: 0.789, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this study, the readability, reliability and quality scores of most websites were found to be suboptimal and hence, there is potential for improvement. As the internet is expanding rapidly as a readily available source of information to the public, it is essential to implement steps to ensure that highest quality information is provided without any commercial motivation or bias. BioMed Central 2018-05-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5930418/ /pubmed/29716564 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4436-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Prasanth, Anton S.
Jayarajah, Umesh
Mohanappirian, Ranganathan
Seneviratne, Sanjeewa A.
Assessment of the quality of patient-oriented information over internet on testicular cancer
title Assessment of the quality of patient-oriented information over internet on testicular cancer
title_full Assessment of the quality of patient-oriented information over internet on testicular cancer
title_fullStr Assessment of the quality of patient-oriented information over internet on testicular cancer
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of the quality of patient-oriented information over internet on testicular cancer
title_short Assessment of the quality of patient-oriented information over internet on testicular cancer
title_sort assessment of the quality of patient-oriented information over internet on testicular cancer
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5930418/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29716564
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4436-0
work_keys_str_mv AT prasanthantons assessmentofthequalityofpatientorientedinformationoverinternetontesticularcancer
AT jayarajahumesh assessmentofthequalityofpatientorientedinformationoverinternetontesticularcancer
AT mohanappirianranganathan assessmentofthequalityofpatientorientedinformationoverinternetontesticularcancer
AT seneviratnesanjeewaa assessmentofthequalityofpatientorientedinformationoverinternetontesticularcancer