Oncology information on the internet

Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 42, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 368-374

  Goto, Yasushi ^a   Nagase, Takahide ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

Author keywords

Cancer; Information; Internet; Oncology

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; CAREGIVER; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNET; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MEDICAL INFORMATION; ONCOLOGY; QUALITY CONTROL;

CAREGIVERS; COMMUNICATION; HEALTH PERSONNEL; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNET; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; ONLINE SYSTEMS; PATIENTS; SOCIAL NETWORKING; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; TEXT MESSAGING;

EID: 84860430805     PISSN: 03682811     EISSN: 14653621     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hys039     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Attitude survey on health and medicine (Iryo-to-Kenko-ni Kansuru Ishiki Chosa) 4. Nihon Keizai Shimbun [Tokyo] 18 Jan. 2009, morning edition: 25.
2. Hesse BW, Nelson DE, Kreps GL, et al. Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the Internet and its implications for health care providers: findings from the first Health Information National Trends Survey. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:2618-24.
3. Baker L, Wagner TH, Singer S, Bundorf MK. Use of the Internet and e-mail for health care information: results from a national survey. J Am Med Assoc 2003;289:2400-6.
4. Ziebland S, Chapple A, Dumelow C, Evans J, Prinjha S, Rozmovits L. How the internet affects patients' experience of cancer: a qualitative study. Br Med J 2004;328:564.
5. Eheman CR, Berkowitz Z, Lee J, et al. Information-seeking styles among cancer patients before and after treatment by demographics and use of information sources. J Health Commun 2009;14:487-502.
6. Fox S. Health Information Online: eight in ten internet users have looked for health information online, with increased interest in diet, fitness, drugs, health insurance, experimental treatments, and particular doctors and hospitals. Pew Internet Am Life Project 2005;1-22.
7. Griffiths F, Lindenmeyer A, Powell J, Lowe P, Thorogood M. Why are health care interventions delivered over the internet? A systematic review of the published literature. J Med Internet Res 2006;8:e10.
8. HINTS-Health Information National Trends Survey [Internet]. hints. cancer.gov [cited 28 December 2011]. Available from: http://hints.cancer.gov/.
9. Hesse BW, Moser RP, Rutten LJ. Surveys of physicians and electronic health information. N Engl J Med 2010;362:859-60.
10. Linssen C, Schook RM, The A-M, Lammers E, Festen J, Postmus PE. A web site on lung cancer: who are the users and what are they looking for? J Thorac Oncol 2007;2:813-8.
11. Cho J, Noh H-I, Ha MH, Kang SN, Choi J-Y, Chang YJ. What kind of cancer information do Internet users need? Support Care Cancer 2011;19:1465-9.
12. Helft PR, Hlubocky F, Daugherty CK. American oncologists' views of internet use by cancer patients: a mail survey of American Society of Clinical Oncology members. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:942-7.
13. Emond Y, de Groot J, Wetzels W, van Osch L. Internet guidance in oncology practice: determinants of health professionals' Internet referral behavior. Psychooncology 2011 (in press). doi:10.1002/pon.2056.
14. Bylund CL, Gueguen JA, D'Agostino TA, Imes RS, Sonet E. Cancer patients' decisions about discussing Internet information with their doctors. Psychooncology 2009;18:1139-46.
15. Bower H. Internet sees growth of unverified health claims. Br Med J 1996;313:381.
16. Mclellan F. 'Like hunger, like thirst': patients, journals, and the internet. Lancet 1998;352(Suppl 2):SII39-43.
17. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa E-R. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. J Am Med Assoc 2002;287:2691-700.
18. Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, et al. Health information on the Internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. J Am Med Assoc 2001;285:2612-21.
19. 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;20:134-41.
20. Hargrave DR, Hargrave UA, Bouffet E. Quality of health information on the Internet in pediatric neuro-oncology. Neuro Oncol 2006;8:175-82.
21. Goto Y, Sekine I, Sekiguchi H, et al. Differences in the quality of information on the internet about lung cancer between the United States and Japan. J Thorac Oncol 2009;4:829-33.
22. Reid T, Beaton C, Davies I, Arnold D, Ward J, Lewis W. Relative quality of Internet-derived oesophageal cancer information. Bull R Coll Surg Engl 2010;92:1-3.
23. Boyer EW, Shannon M, Hibberd PL. Web sites with misinformation about illicit drugs. N Engl J Med 2001;345:469-71.
24. Nemoto K, Tachikawa H, Sodeyama N, et al. Quality of Internet information referring to mental health and mental disorders in Japan. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2007;61:243-8.
25. Ansani NT, Vogt M, Henderson BAF, et al. Quality of arthritis information on the Internet. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2005;62:1184-9.
26. Technology overview-Company [Internet]. google.com [cited 23 December 2011]. Available from: http://www.google.com/intl/en/about/corporate/company/tech.html.
27. Griffiths KM, Christensen H. Website quality indicators for consumers. J Med Internet Res 2005;7:e55.
28. Meric F, Bernstam EV, Mirza NQ, et al. Breast cancer on the world wide web: cross sectional survey of quality of information and popularity of websites. Br Med J 2002;324:577-81.
29. Biermann JS, Golladay GJ, Greenfield ML, Baker LH. Evaluation of cancer information on the Internet. Cancer 1999;86:381-90.
30. Jadad AR, Gagliardi A. Rating health information on the Internet: navigating to knowledge or to Babel? J Am Med Assoc 1998;279:611-4.
31. Gagliardi A, Jadad AR. Examination of instruments used to rate quality of health information on the internet: chronicle of a voyage with an unclear destination. Br Med J 2002;324:569-73.
32. Wilson P. How to find the good and avoid the bad or ugly: a short guide to tools for rating quality of health information on the internet. Br Med J 2002;324:598-602.
33. Bernstam EV, Shelton DM, Walji M, Meric-Bernstam F. Instruments to assess the quality of health information on the World Wide Web: what can our patients actually use? Int J Med Inform 2005;74:13-9.
34. Winker MA, Flanagin A, Chi-Lum B, et al. Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet: principles governing AMA web sites. American Medical Association. J Am Med Assoc 2000;283:1600-6.
35. HONcode: Principles-Quality and trustworthy health information [Internet]. hon.ch [cited 28 December 2011]. Available from: http://www.hon.ch/.
36. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health 1999;53:105-11.
37. DISCERN-Welcome to DISCERN [Internet]. discern.org.uk [cited 28 December 2011]. Available from: http://www.discern.org.uk/.
38. Gan-joho.net [Internet]. Gan-joho.net [cited 3 December 2011]. Available from: http://www.xn-v8jxh638i7fh.net/.
39. Monaco V, Krills SK. On-line information about cancer clinical trials: evaluating the Web sites of comprehensive cancer centers. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2003;470-4.
40. Simon C, Hegedus S. Exploring websites on cancer clinical trials: an empirical review. Contemp Clin Trials 2005;26:530-3.
41. Atkinson NL, Massett HA, Mylks C, Hanna B, Deering MJ, Hesse BW. User-centered research on breast cancer patient needs and preferences of an Internet-based clinical trial matching system. J Med Internet Res 2007;9:e13.
42. A word from the executive director [Internet]. Life Raft Group newsletter: June 2007. 2007 [cited 19 December 2011]. Available from: http://www.liferaftgroup.org/docs/nesletters/jne2007nwsltr.pdf.
43. Esquivel A, Meric-Bernstam F, Bernstam EV. Accuracy and self correction of information received from an internet breast cancer list: content analysis. Br Med J 2006;332:939-42.
44. Meier A, Lyons EJ, Frydman G, Forlenza M, Rimer BK. How cancer survivors provide support on cancer-related Internet mailing lists. J Med Internet Res 2007;9:e12.
45. Bender JL, Jimenez-Marroquin M-C, Jadad AR. Seeking support on Facebook: a content analysis of breast cancer groups. J Med Internet Res 2011;13:e16.
46. Frosch DL, Kaplan RM, Felitti VJ. A randomized controlled trial comparing internet and video to facilitate patient education for men considering the prostate specific antigen test. J Gen Intern Med 2003;18:781-7.
47. Graham AL, Cobb NK, Papandonatos GD, et al. A randomized trial of Internet and telephone treatment for smoking cessation. Arch Intern Med 2011;171:46-53.
48. Frosch DL, Bhatnagar V, Tally S, Hamori CJ, Kaplan RM. Internet patient decision support: a randomized controlled trial comparing alternative approaches for men considering prostate cancer screening. Arch Intern Med 2008;168:363-9.
49. Lieberman MA, Golant M, Giese-Davis J, et al. Electronic support groups for breast carcinoma. Cancer 2003;97:920-5.
50. Hill-Kayser CE, Vachani C, Hampshire MK, Jacobs LA, Metz JM. An internet tool for creation of cancer survivorship care plans for survivors and health care providers: design, implementation, use and user satisfaction. J Med Internet Res 2009;11:e39.
51. Kishimoto K, Noriko F. Use of anonymous Web communities and websites by medical consumer in Japan to research drug information. Yakugaku Zasshi 2011;131:685-91.
52. Trumbo CW. Cancer information on the world wide web: gross characteristics. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:332-3.
53. Langton JM, Drew AK, Mellish L, Olivier J, Ward RL, Pearson S-A. The quality of web-based oncology guidelines and protocols: how do international sites stack up? Br J Cancer 2011;105:1166-72.
54. Kulkarni AV, Aziz B, Shams I, Busse JW. Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals. J Am Med Assoc 2009;302:1092-6.
55. Chou W-YS, Hunt Y, Folkers A, Augustson E. Cancer survivorship in the age of YouTube and social media: a narrative analysis. J Med Internet Res 2011;13:e7.
56. Ferguson T, Group TE-PSW. e-patients: how they can help us heal healthcare [Internet]. e-patients.net. 2007 [cited 26 December 2011]. Available from: http://e-patients.net/e-Patients_White_Paper.pdf.
57. Dave deBronkart: Meet e-Patient Dave [Internet]. ted.com [cited 28 December 2011]. Available from: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/dave_debronkart_meet_e_patient_dave.html.
58. Wen K-Y, Kreps G, Zhu F, Miller S. Consumers' perceptions about and use of the Internet for personal health records and health information exchange: analysis of the 2007 Health Information National Trends Survey. J Med Internet Res 2010;12:e73.
59. Eddens KS, Kreuter MW, Morgan JC, et al. Disparities by race and ethnicity in cancer survivor stories available on the web. J Med Internet Res 2009;11:e50.
60. Chou W-YS, Liu B, Post S, Hesse B. Health-related Internet use among cancer survivors: data from the Health Information National Trends Survey, 2003-2008. J Cancer Surviv 2011;5:263-70.
61. Greenwald R.. And a diagnostic test was performed. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2089-90.
62. Martin M. Semantic Web may be cancer information's next step forward. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:1215-8.