pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Quality of health information on the Internet in pediatric neuro-oncology - PubMed

Quality of health information on the Internet in pediatric neuro-oncology

Darren R Hargrave et al. Neuro Oncol. 2006 Apr.

Abstract

The Internet is now the single largest source of health information and is used by many patients and their families who are affected by childhood brain tumors. To assess the quality of pediatric neuro-oncology information on the Internet, we used search engines to look for information on five common tumor types (brain stem glioma, craniopharyngioma, ependymoma, low-grade glioma, and medulloblastoma). The Web sites were evaluated for content quality by using the validated DISCERN rating instrument. Breadth of content and its accuracy were also scored by a checklist tool. Readability statistics were computed on the highest-rated sites. Of 114 evaluated Web sites, the sources were as follows: institutional, 46%; commercial, 35%; charitable, 15%; support group, 2%; and alternative medicine, 2%. Good interobserver correlation was found for both ratings instruments. The DISCERN tool rated Web sites as excellent (4%), good (7%), fair (29%), poor (39%), or very poor (21%). Only 5% of the Web sites provided one or more inaccurate pieces of information. Web sites were found deficient in topics covering etiology, late effects, prognosis, and treatment choices. Few sites offered information in languages other than English, and readability statistics showed an average required reading level of U.S. grade 12+ (the suggested level being grades 6-8 for an adult audience). The Internet is increasingly being used as a source of oncology information for patients and their families. Health care professionals should be actively involved in developing high-quality information for use in the next generation of Web sites.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Combined results of the DISCERN rating tool questions (1 = low, 5 = high).

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Content of Web sites and accuracy of information.

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

DISCERN instrument rating of Web site content by tumor type.

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

DISCERN instrument rating of Web site content by Web site type.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. AMA. American Medical Association (2006) Medical and Health Information Sites on the Internet Available at www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/1905.html (last updated January 2006).
    1. Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, Algazy JI, Kravitz RL, Broder MS, Kanouse DE, Munoz JA, Puyol JA, Lara M, Watkins KE, Yang H, McGlynn EA. Health information on the Internet: Accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA. 2001;285:2612–2621. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bichakjian CK, Schwartz JL, Wang TS, Hall JM, Johnson TM, Biermann JS. Melanoma information on the Internet: Often incomplete—a public health opportunity? J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:134–141. - PubMed
    1. Biermann JS, Golladay GJ, Greenfield ML, Baker LH. Evaluation of cancer information on the Internet. Cancer. 1999;86:381–390. - PubMed
    1. Bouffet E, Foreman N. Chemotherapy for intracranial ependymomas. Childs Nerv Syst. 1999;15:563–570. - PubMed

MeSH terms