Treatments and Services for Neurodevelopmental Disorders on Advocacy Websites: Information or Evaluation?
- 294 Downloads
The Internet has quickly gained popularity as a major source of health-related information, but its impact is unclear. Here, we investigate the extent to which advocacy websites for three neurodevelopmental disorders—cerebral palsy (CP), autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD)—inform stakeholders about treatment options, and discuss the ethical challenges inherent in providing such information online. We identified major advocacy websites for each disorder and assessed website accountability, the number, attributes, and accessibility of treatments described, and the valence of treatment information. With the exception of FASD websites, we found that advocacy websites provide a plethora of information about a wide variety of readily available products and services. Treatment information is primarily targeted at families and is overwhelmingly encouraging, regardless of the type or conventionality of treatments. Many websites acknowledge corporate sponsors. While the majority do not overtly advertise or endorse specific brands, they also do not prominently display disclaimers about the nature and intent of treatment information. Thus, while advocacy websites are organized to serve as information clearinghouses, they implicitly appear to provide endorsement of selected treatments and services. We conclude with recommendations for new partnerships between government-funded health organizations, advocacy and investigators to make more transparent the role of online information in informing treatment options and improving the evaluation of information.
KeywordsAutism Cerebral Palsy Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Disorder Treatments Internet Advocacy Neuroethics
NeuroDevNet Inc. (D. Goldowitz, PI), CIHR CNE #85117, BCKDF and CFI (J. Illes, PI). The authors wish to thank Ania Mizgalewicz for her assistance with this project.
- 4.Mandl, K.D., S. Feit, B.M.G. Pena, and I.S. Kohane. 2000. Growth and determinants of access in patient e-mail and internet use. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 154: 508–511.Google Scholar
- 10.American Psychiatric Association. 2000. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th ed, text revision. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric AssociationGoogle Scholar
- 12.Seligman, M., and R.B. Darling. 2007. Ordinary families, special children: A systems approach to childhood disability, 3rd ed. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- 15.Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 2010. Medical profiling and online medicine: The ethics of ‘personalised healthcare’ in a consumer age. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.Google Scholar
- 16.Hardey, M. 2001. ‘E-health’: The internet and the transformation of patients into consumers and producers of health knowledge. Information, Communication & Society 4(3): 388–405.Google Scholar
- 22.Krippendorff, K. 2004. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- 23.The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Accessed 25 September 2010, from http://nccam.nih.gov/.
- 27.Caruso, D. 2010. Autism in the US: Social movement and legal change. American Journal of Law & Medicine 36: 1–86.Google Scholar
- 28.Offit, P. 2008. Autism’s false prophets: Bad science, risky medicine, and the search for a cure. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
- 30.Neff, J. 1999. Internet could see more Web site sponsorships. Advertising Age 70(11): s6–s7.Google Scholar
- 31.McKinley, J., H. Cattermole, and C.W. Oliver. 1999. The quality of surgical information on the Internet. Journal of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh 44: 265–268.Google Scholar
- 32.Evans, M., A. Shaw, E.A. Thompson, S. Falk, P. Turton, T. Thompson, and D. Sharp. 2007. Decisions to use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) by male cancer patients: Information-seeking roles and types of evidence used. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 7: 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Fox, S. 2006. Pew internet and American life project: Online health search 2006. Accessed: October 2010, http://www.pewinternet.org.
- 34.Jacoby, J., D.E. Speller, and C. Kohn Berning. 1974. Brand choice as a function of information load: replication and extension. Journal of Marketing Research 1(1): 33–42.Google Scholar
- 35.Scammon, D.L. 1975. “Information load” and consumers. Journal of Consumer Research 4(3): 148–155.Google Scholar
- 38.Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Funded Research Database. Accessed 25 October 2010, from http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/826.html.
- 39.May, P.A., and J.P. Gossage. 2001. Estimating the prevalence of fetal alcohol syndrome: A summary. The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Alcohol Research & Health 25: 159–167.Google Scholar
- 42.Fox, S. and L. Rainie. 2000. Pew internet and american life project: The online health care revolution: How the Web helps Americans take better care of themselves. Accessed: October 2010, from http://www.pewinternet.org.
- 43.Barwick, M., K. Boydell, E. Stasiulis, H. Ferguson, K. Blasé, and D. Fixsen. 2005. Knowledge transfer and evidence based practice in children’s mental health. Toronto: Children’s Mental Health Ontario.Google Scholar
- 47.Jacobson, J. 2000. Early intensive behavioral intervention: Emergence of a consumer-driven service model. The Behavior Analyst 23: 149–171.Google Scholar
- 48.National Research Council. 2001. Educating children with autism. Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar