Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quality of the patient-oriented web-based information on esophageal cancer

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

Abstract

This study was aimed to analyze the readability and quality of patient education websites on esophageal cancer. Yahoo!, Google, and Bing search engines were searched using keywords esophageal cancer, esophageal tumor, esophageal tumor, esophageal malignancy, esophageal cancer, esophageal tumor, esophageal tumor, and esophageal malignancy. The first 50 websites resulting in each keyword search were evaluated using validated FRES, LIDA, and DISCERN scores to assess readability, usability, and reliability, and quality of information, respectively. Non-parametric tests were used for statistical analysis. A total of 108 eligible websites were included in the analysis. Thirty (27.8%) out of the 108 eligible web sites had obtained Health on the Net (HON) code certification. The median FRES score of the included websites was 48.25 out of 100 (range: 15.6–70.1). The median LIDA usability and reliability scores were 46.5 out of 54 (range: 22–54) and 39.0 out of 51 (range: 10–51), respectively. The median DISCERN score was 50.5 out of 80 (range: 23–79). A low DISCERN score (≤ 50%) was found in 50% (n = 54) of the websites. The DISCERN score was found to be significantly associated with LIDA usability, reliability, LIDA overall scores (p < 0.001), and HON code certification (p = 0.01). The quality of the websites providing patient-centered information on the Internet ranged between moderate and low with regards to readability, usability, and reliability scores. Better informed decisions on treatment may be facilitated with the access to good quality information online. Therefore, strategies need to be implemented to regulate and standardize websites to provide good quality, accurate information.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The data used in the above analysis will be available on reasonable request from the corresponding author.

Abbreviations

FRES:

Flesch reading ease score

HON:

health on the net foundation code of conduct

SPSS:

statistical package for social sciences

References

  1. Beredjiklian PK, Bozentka DJ, Steinberg DR, Bernstein J (2000) Evaluating the source and content of orthopaedic information on the Internet: the case of carpal tunnel syndrome. JBJS 82(11):1540–1543

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bol N, Smets EMA, Rutgers MM, Burgers JA, de Haes HCJM, Loos EF, van Weert JCM (2013) Do videos improve website satisfaction and recall of online cancer-related information in older lung cancer patients? J Patient Educ Couns 92(3):404–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A (2018) Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 68(6):394–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brin S, Page L (1998) The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine, WWW7: proceedings of the seventh international conference on World Wide Web 7. Elsevier Science Publishers BV Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  5. Burke E, Harkins P, Saeed M, Salama M, Ahmed I (2019) “Dr. Google” will see you now—assessing the quality of information on oesophageal cancer on the internet. J Gastrointest Surg:1–5

  6. 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 Community Health 53(2):105–111

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Clement WA, Wilson S, Bingham BJ (2002) A guide to creating your own patient-oriented website. J R Soc Med 95(2):64–67. https://doi.org/10.1258/jrsm.95.2.64

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. D’Alessandro DM, Kingsley P, Johnson-West J (2001) The readability of pediatric patient education materials on the World Wide Web. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 155(7):807–812. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.155.7.807

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Discern Online (1997) The DISCERN Instrument. http://www.discern.org.uk/discern_instrument.php. Accessed 6 Feb 2020

  10. Eysenbach G, Köhler C (2002) How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. Bmj 324(7337):573–577. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7337.573

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Fahy E, Hardikar R, Fox A, Mackay S (2014) Quality of patient health information on the Internet: reviewing a complex and evolving landscape. Australas Med J 7(1):24–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fox S (2013) Health and technology in the U.S. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2013/12/04/health-and-technology-in-the-u-s/. Accessed 27 Apr 2020

  13. Griffiths KM, Christensen H (2005) Website quality indicators for consumers. J Med Internet Res 7(5):e55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Heron DE, Gibson MK, Tanabe KK (2018) Management of locally advanced, unresectable and inoperable esophageal cancer. UpToDate

  15. Jayarajah U, Fernando A, Samarasekera DN, Seneviratne S (2020) The incidence and histological patterns of oesophageal cancer in Sri Lanka from 2001 to 2010: Analysis of national cancer registry data. Eur J Cancer Care 29(1):e13182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jayasighe R, Ranasinghe S, Jayarajah U, Seneviratne S (2020) Quality of online information for the general public on COVID-19. Patient Educ Couns. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2020.08.001

  17. Kim CH, Lee Y-CA, Hung RJ, Boffetta P, Dong X, Wampfler JA, Cote ML et al (2015) Secondhand tobacco smoke exposure and lung adenocarcinoma in situ/minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (AIS/MIA). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 24(12):1902–1906. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0436

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Minervation (2008) The Minervation validation instrument for healthcare websites (LIDA tool). http://www.minervation.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Minervation-LIDA-instrument-v1-2.pdf. Accessed 6 Feb 2020

  19. National Institutes of Health (2015) How to write easy-to-read health materials. MedlinePlus. https://www.scribd.com/document/261199628/How-to-Write-Easy-To-Read-Health-Materials-MedlinePlus. Accessed 27 Apr 2020

  20. Prasanth AS, Jayarajah U, Mohanappirian R, Seneviratne SA (2018) Assessment of the quality of patient-oriented information over internet on testicular cancer. BMC Cancer 18(1):491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Readable (2017) The Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. https://readable.com/blog/the-flesch-reading-ease-and-flesch-kincaid-grade-level/. Accessed 6 Feb 2020

  22. Stahl M, Mariette C, Haustermans K, Cervantes A, Arnold D, ESMO Guidelines Working Group (2013) Oesophageal cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 24(suppl_6):vi51–vi56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Talagala IA, Arambepola C (2018) Changes in quality of life following initial treatment of oesophageal carcinoma: a cohort study from Sri Lanka. BMC Cancer 18(1):1184. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-5106-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Udayanga V, Jayarajah U, Colonne SD, Seneviratne SA (2020) Quality of the patient-oriented information on thyroid cancer in the internet. Health Policy Technol

  25. Waidyasekera RH, Jayarajah U, Samarasekera DN (2020) Quality and scientific accuracy of patient-oriented information on the internet on minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer. Health Policy Technol 9(1):86–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2019.11.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Colombo, P.O. Box 271, Kynsey Road, Colombo 8, Western Province, Sri Lanka

    Ravindri Jayasinghe, Sonali Ranasinghe, Umesh Jayarajah & Sanjeewa Seneviratne

Authors
  1. Ravindri Jayasinghe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sonali Ranasinghe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Umesh Jayarajah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sanjeewa Seneviratne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

RJ, SR, and UJ contributed to the concept and design of study, acquisition of data, analysis, interpretation of data, drafting the article, and final approval of the version to be published. SS contributed to concept and design of study, revising it critically for important intellectual content, and final approval of the version to be published.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Umesh Jayarajah.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare they have no competing interests

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable in this type of study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 53 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jayasinghe, R., Ranasinghe, S., Jayarajah, U. et al. Quality of the patient-oriented web-based information on esophageal cancer. J Canc Educ 37, 586–592 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01849-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01849-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation