Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Content and Quality of Health Information on the Internet for Patients and Families on Adult Kidney Cancer

  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Internet is one of the major sources for health information for patients and their families, particularly when patients face serious life-threatening conditions such as kidney cancer in adults. In this study, we evaluate the content and quality of health information on adult kidney cancer using several validated instruments. We accessed the three most popular search engines (Google, Yahoo, Bing), using two terms: “kidney cancer” and “renal cell carcinoma,” and reviewed the top 30 hits. After exclusion of duplicated websites, websites targeting health care professionals, and unrelated websites, 35 websites were included. Content was assessed using a 22-item checklist adapted from the American Cancer Society. We assessed website quality using the DISCERN questionnaire, HONcode and JAMA benchmark criteria, readability using three readability scores, and ALEXA for global traffic ranking systems. The average website had 16 of 22 content items while 6 websites fulfilled all 22 items. Among all websites, the average DISCERN quality score was 42 out of 80, 15 (42.8 %) of websites had HONcode certification, and only 3 (8.5 %) fulfilled all JAMA benchmark criteria. The average website readability was at the ninth grade reading level. The content and quality of health-related information on the Internet for adult kidney cancer are variable in comprehensiveness and quality. Many websites are difficult to read without a high school education. A standardized approach to presenting cancer information on the Internet for patients and families may be warranted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F (2015) Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer J Int Cancer. doi:10.1002/ijc.29210

    Google Scholar 

  2. American Cancer Society: Cancer Facts and Figures (2015). Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society. Available online. Accessed 30 Oct 2015

  3. SEER Cancer Statistics Factsheets: kidney and renal pelvis cancer. National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD, http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/kidrp.html

  4. Chow WH, Dong LM, Devesa SS (2010) Epidemiology and risk factors for kidney cancer. Nat Rev Urol. doi:10.1038/nrurol.2010.46

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Cohen HT, McGovern FJ (2005) Renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. doi:10.1056/NEJMra043172

    Google Scholar 

  6. Motzer RJ, Bander NH, Nanus DM (1996) Renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. doi:10.1056/NEJM199609193351207

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wallach JB, McGarry T, Torres J (2011) Lymphangitic metastasis of recurrent renal cell carcinoma to the contralateral lung causing lymphangitic carcinomatosis and respiratory symptoms. Curr Oncol

  8. Fogel J, Albert SM, Schnabel F, Ditkoff BA, Neugut AI (2002) Internet use and social support in women with breast cancer. Health Psychology: official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

  9. Fogel J, Albert SM, Schnabel F, Ditkoff BA, Neugut AI (2002) Use of the internet by women with breast cancer. J Med Internet Res. doi:10.2196/jmir.4.2.e9

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Eysenbach G (2003) The impact of the Internet on cancer outcomes. CA Cancer J Clin

  11. Purcell GP, Wilson P, Delamothe T (2002) The quality of health information on the internet. BMJ (Clinical research ed.)

  12. Boyer C, Gaudinat A, Baujard V, Geissbühler A (2007) Health on the Net Foundation: assessing the quality of health web pages all over the world. Stud Health Technol Inf

  13. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa ER (2002) Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA J Am Med Assoc

  14. Jadad AR, Gagliardi A (1998) Rating health information on the Internet: navigating to knowledge or to Babel? JAMA J Am Med Assoc

  15. Bower H (1996) Internet sees growth of unverified health claims. BMJ (Clinical research ed.)

  16. Chalmers, I. 2001. Invalid health information is potentially lethal. BMJ (Clinical research ed.).

  17. Barker S, Charlton NP, Holstege CP (2010) Accuracy of internet recommendations for prehospital care of venomous snake bites. Wilderness Environ Med. doi:10.1016/j.wem.2010.08.016

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. McKearney TC, McKearney RM (2013) The quality and accuracy of internet information on the subject of ear tubes. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2013.03.021

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Statista Inc. http://www.statista.com. Accessed 1 Nov 2015

  20. Demetriades AK, Alg VS, Hardwidge C (2014) Are internet sites providing evidence-based information for patients suffering with trigeminal neuralgia? Scott Med J. doi:10.1177/0036933014529243

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. American Cancer Society available from: http://www.cancer.org/index. Accessed 09 Jan 2016

  22. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R (1999) DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Commun Health

  23. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA (1997). Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: caveant lector et viewor—let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA J Am Med Assoc

  24. Health on the Net Foundation, the HON code of conduct for medical and health websites (HONcode), available from: https://www.healthonnet.org/honcode/conduct.html. Accessed 09 Jan 2016

  25. Barnes JA, Davies L (2015) Reading grade level and completeness of freely available materials on thyroid nodules: there is work to be done. Thyroid Off J Am Thyroid Assoc. doi:10.1089/thy.2014.0352

    Google Scholar 

  26. Wasserman M, Baxter NN, Rosen B, Burnstein M, Halverson AL (2014) Systematic review of internet patient information on colorectal cancer surgery. Dis Colon Rectum. doi:10.1097/DCR.0000000000000011

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sobota A, Ozakinci G (2015) The quality and readability of online consumer information about gynecologic cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer Off J Int Gynecol Cancer Soc. doi:10.1097/IGC.0000000000000362

    Google Scholar 

  28. López-Jornet P, Camacho-Alonso F (2009) The quality of internet sites providing information relating to oral cancer. Oral Oncol. doi:10.1016/j.oraloncology.2009.03.017

    Google Scholar 

  29. Borgmann H, Wölm JH, Vallo S, Mager R, Huber J, Breyer J, Salem J, Loeb S, Haferkamp A, Tsaur I (2015) Prostate cancer on the web-expedient tool for patients’ decision-making? J Cancer Educ Off J Am Assoc Cancer Educ. doi:10.1007/s13187-015-0891-

    Google Scholar 

  30. Grohol JM, Slimowicz J, Granda R (2014) The quality of mental health information commonly searched for on the Internet. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. doi:10.1089/cyber.2013.0258

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Grewal P, Alagaratnam S (2013) The quality and readability of colorectal cancer information on the Internet. International journal of surgery, England. doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2013.03.006/

    Google Scholar 

  32. Veer V, Alder G, Ullal U (2014) The quality of snoring treatment information on the Internet. Europ Arch Otorhinolaryngology Off J Eur Fed Otorhinolaryngological Soc (EUFOS) Affiliated Ger Soc Otorhinolaryngology Head Neck Surg. doi:10.1007/s00405-014-3153-9

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Author Contributions

Dr. Alsaiari (aaalsaiari@email.gwu.edu) assessed each of the included websites using the questionnaires and instruments, drafted the first manuscript, and approved the final manuscript. Dr. Joury (ajoury@email.gwu.edu) conceptualized and designed the study, conducted the website search, managed the data, drafted the manuscript, and approved the final manuscript. Drs. Aljuaid and Wazzan (mossab@email.gwu.edu; maawazzan@email.gwu.edu) assessed the included websites using the questionnaires and instruments, reviewed and revised the manuscript, and approved the final manuscript. Dr. Pines (pinesj@email.gwu.edu) was the senior author; he supervised the project throughout, drafted the manuscript, and approved the final manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, USA

    Ahmed Alsaiari, Abdulaziz Joury, Mossab Aljuaid, Mohammed Wazzan & Jesse M. Pines

  2. University of Jeddah, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

    Ahmed Alsaiari & Mohammed Wazzan

  3. King Salman Heart Center, King Fahd Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Abdulaziz Joury & Mossab Aljuaid

  4. Department of Emergency Medicine and Health Policy and Management, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 900 23rd St NW, Washington, DC, 20037, USA

    Jesse M. Pines

  5. Department of Health Policy and Management, The George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health, Washington, DC, USA

    Jesse M. Pines

Authors
  1. Ahmed Alsaiari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Abdulaziz Joury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mossab Aljuaid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammed Wazzan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jesse M. Pines
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jesse M. Pines.

Ethics declarations

Funding Source

This research received no funding.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alsaiari, A., Joury, A., Aljuaid, M. et al. The Content and Quality of Health Information on the Internet for Patients and Families on Adult Kidney Cancer. J Canc Educ 32, 878–884 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-016-1039-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-016-1039-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation