Breast cancer: Patient information needs reflected in English and German web sites

British Journal of Cancer

Volumn 91, Issue 8, 2004, Pages 1482-1487

  Weissenberger, C ^a   Jonassen, S ^a   Beranek Chiu, J ^a   Neumann, M ^a   Muller D ^a   Bartelt, S ^a   Schulz, S ^b   Monting J S ^b   Henne, K ^a   Gitsch, G ^a   Witucki, G ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

^c Deaconess Hospital   (Germany)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasms; Complementary therapies; Information services *standards utilisation; Internet; Internet *standards utilisation; Quality assurance, health care

Indexed keywords

ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; COMPARATIVE STUDY; ETHNIC OR RACIAL ASPECTS; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; INFORMATION SERVICE; INTERNET; LANGUAGE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; PALLIATIVE THERAPY; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT INFORMATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; BREAST TUMOR; FEMALE; GERMANY; HEALTH EDUCATION; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; STANDARD; UNITED KINGDOM;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; ENGLAND; FEMALE; GERMANY; HEALTH EDUCATION; HUMANS; INFORMATION SERVICES; INTERNET; LANGUAGE; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING;

EID: 7944227869     PISSN: 00070920     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602168     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Achenbach J (1996) Reality check: you can't believe everything you read, but you'd better believe this. Washington Post C1 (December 4, 1996)
2. Argus Associates. Ratings System (2002) http://www.clearinghouse.net/ ratings.html (accessed March 9, 2004)
3. Beyerstein BL (2001) Alternative medicine and common errors of reasoning. Acad Med 76: 230-237
4. Bichakjian CK, Schwartz JL, Wang TS, Hall JM, Johnson TM, Biermann JS (2002) Melanoma information on the Internet: often incomplete - a public health opportunity? J Clin Oncol 20: 134-141
5. Biel M (1997) 'I want to stop preconceptions' ('Ich will aufräumen mit Vorurteilen'). Stern Magazine (February 27, 1997)
6. Blanchard D, Erblich J, Montgomery GH, Bovbjerg DH (2002) Read all about it: the over-representation of breast cancer in popular magazines. Prev Med 35: 343-348
7. 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: 105-111
8. Chen X, Siu LL (2001) Impact of the media and the internet on oncology: survey of cancer patients and oncologists in Canada. J Clin Oncol 19: 4291-4297
9. Ciolek TM, Goltz IM (2001) Information Quality WWW Virtual Library (The Internet Guide to Construction of Quality Online Resources)
10. Cluzeau F, Burgers J (2002) The AGREE Collaboration. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) Instrument.
11. Cohen JA (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psych Meas 20: 37-46
12. Degner LF, Kristjanson LJ, Bowman D, Sloan JA, Carriere KC, O'Neil J, Bilodeau B, Watson P, Mueller B (1997) Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. JAMA 277: 1485-1492
13. Ernst E, Schmidt K (2002) 'Alternative' cancer cures via the Internet? Br J Cancer 87: 479-480, doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6600513
14. 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 287: 2691-2700
15. Fogel J, Albert SM, Schnabel F, Ditkoff BA, Neugut AI (2002) Use of the Internet by Women with Breast Cancer. JMIR 4: e9 http://www.jmir.org; http://www.jmir.org/2002/2/e9, (accessed March 9, 2004)
16. Forbriger A, Glattes M (2003) The Internet through the eye of breastcancer patients and their families - or the dilemma of credible and usable websites and the patients' needs. http://www.mednet2002.org/abstracts/display. cfm?id = 10513211 (accessed March 9, 2004)
17. Gordon-Murnane L (1999) Evaluating net evaluators. Searcher 7(2): 57-66
18. Greer S (2000) Fighting spirit in patients with cancer. Lancet 355: 847-848
19. Guadagnino C (2000) Using medical information on the Internet. Physician's News Digest. http://www.physiciansnews.com/spotlight/700.html (accessed March 9, 2004)
20. Hainer MI, Tsai N, Komura ST, Chiu CL (2000) Fatal hepatorenal failure associated with hydrazine sulfate. Ann Intern Med 133: 877-880
21. Health On the Net (HON) (2002) HON Code of Conduct (HONcode) for medical and health web sites. http://www.hon.ch/HONcode (accessed March 9, 2004)
22. Hiller B (2004) Public perception of cancer risk - an evaluation of requests to KID, the German cancer information service. German Cancer Congress 2004 (February 27, 2004) http://www.kukm.de/krebskongress2004/abstracts/PO794. pdf (accessed March 9, 2004)
23. International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) (2004) Cyber trafficking in controlled drugs on the rise. http://www.incb.org (accessed March 9, 2004)
24. Jitaru E, Moisil I, Jitaru M-C (1999) Criteria for evaluating the quality of health related sites on Internet. MEDINF 2000 - The 23rd National Conference on Medical Informatics, Telemedicine and Telematics (October 15, 1999)
25. Kögel M, Longo P (2001) Trendletters NFO Europe/Infratest. http://www.nfoeurope.com (accessed March 9, 2004)
26. Kunst H, Groot D, Latthe PM, Latthe M, Khan KS (2002) Accuracy of information on apparently credible websites: survey of five common health topics. BMJ 324: 581-582
27. LoBuono C (2000) Using the Internet and e-mail in your practice. Patient Care (December 30, 2000) http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m3233/24_34/68743460/ print.jhtml (accessed March 9, 2004)
28. Mack B (2001) 'Operation cure. All' wages new battle in ongoing - war against Internet health fraud. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2001/06/cureall.htm (accessed March 9, 2004)
29. Markman M (2001) Interactions between academic oncology and alternative/complementary/integrative medicine: complex but necessary. J Clin Oncol 19: 52S-53S
30. McKenzie BC (1996) Medicine and the Internet. New York: Oxford University Press Inc
31. Meric F, Bernstam EV, Mirza NQ, Musen MA (2002) Breast cancer on the world wide web: cross sectional survey of quality of information and popularity of web sites. BMJ 324(7227): 577-581
32. Nicholson A (1996) Diet and the prevention and treatment of breast cancer. Altern Ther Health Med 2: 32-38
33. NOAH (2002) Choosing the links: how NOAH (New York Online Access to Health) selects material. http://www.noah-health.org/english/collection.html (accessed March 9, 2004)
34. OMNI (2002) OMNI guidelines for resource evaluation. http://omni.nott.ac. uk/agec/archive-evalguid.html (accessed March 9, 2004)
35. Pandolfini C, Impicciatore P, Bonati M (2000) Parents on the web: risks for quality management of cough in children. Pediatrics 105: e1
36. Pichler N, Gilg HJ (2001) Women capture the Internet: more than five million women are online Germany (Frauen erobern das Internet: Erstmals mehr als fünf Millionen Frauen in Deutschland online). http://de.netvalue.com/ presse/index_frame.htm?fichier = cp0025.htm (accessed March 9, 2004)
37. Pimienta D, Lamey B, Prado D, Sztrum M (2001) The fifth study on languages and the Internet (Networks and Development Foundation). http://funredes.org/LC/english/L5 (accessed June 30, 2004)
38. Prümel U, Philippsen J, Iseringhausen O (2002) Quality assurance for health care information systems: AFGIS, the German Action Forum Health Information System, an initiative of the German Ministry of Health. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 128(Suppl 1) (25th German Cancer Congress): O836no
39. Schulz S, Klar R, Auhuber T, Schrader U, Koop A, Kreuz R, Oppermann R, Simm H (2001) Quality criteria of Electronic Publication in Medicine - Criteria Catalogue of GMDS-AG CBT (Qualitätskriterien für Elektronische Publikationen in der Medizin - Kriterienkatalog der GMDS-AG CBT). Inform Biometrie Epidemiol Med Biol 31: 153-166
40. Shon J, Musen MA (1999) The low availability of metadata elements for evaluating the quality of medical information on the World Wide Web. Proc AMIA Symp 945-949
41. 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 277: 1244-1245
42. Smith ED, Phillips JM, Price MM (2001) Screening and early detection among racial and ethnic minority women. Semin Oncol Nurs 17(3): 159-170
43. Su L, Chen H-L, Dong X (1998) Evaluation of Web-based search engines form the end-user's perspective: a pilot study (Information Access in the Global Information Economy). Inform Today (Proc 61st ASIS Annu Meet) 35: 348-361
44. Taylor H, Leitman R (2001) eHealth traffic critically dependent on search engines and portals (Most of the 100 million people who look for health information online do so using a portal or search engine. Only a quarter go directly to an eHealth site.). Health Care News 1, www.harrisinter-active.com (accessed March 9, 2004)
45. URAC: Quality health web sites you can trust (2002) http:// websiteaccreditation.urac.org (accessed March 9, 2004)
46. Weir HK, Thun MJ, Hankey BF, Ries LA, Howe HL, Wingo PA, Jemal A, Ward E, Anderson RN, Edwards BK (2003) Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2000, featuring the uses of surveillance data for cancer prevention and control. J Natl Cancer Inst 95: 1276-1299
47. Weissenberger C (2004) Bisphosphonates on the Internet. Bone Depeche (in press)
48. Werneke U, Earl J, Seydel C, Horn O, Crichton P, Fannon D (2004) Potential health risks of complementary alternative medicines in cancer patients. Br J Cancer 90: 408-413
49. Ziebland S, Chapple A, Dumelow C, Evans J, Prinjha S, Rozmovits L (2004) How the internet affects patients' experience of cancer: a qualitative study. BMJ 328: 564