Communicating cancer treatment information using the Web: Utilizing the patient's perspective in website development

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2014, Pages

  Hopmans, Wendy ^a   Damman, Olga C ^a   Timmermans, Danielle R M ^a   Haasbeek, Cornelis J A ^a   Slotman, Ben J ^a   Senan, Suresh ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Internet; Lung cancer; Patient information; Treatment decisions

Indexed keywords

AGED; COMPREHENSION; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HEALTH LITERACY; HUMAN; INTERNET; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOMENCLATURE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PROCEDURES; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; PSYCHOLOGY; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RADIOSURGERY; STANDARDS; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COMPREHENSION; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HEALTH LITERACY; HUMANS; INTERNET; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RADIOSURGERY; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC;

EID: 84964313497     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726947     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12911-014-0116-4     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Deber RB, Kraetschmer N, Irvine J: What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making? Arch Intern Med 1996, 156(13):1414-1420.
2. Frosch DL, Kaplan RM: Shared decision making in clinical practice: past research and future directions. Am J Prev Med 1999, 17:285-294.
3. Chewning B, Bylund CL, Shah B, Arora NK, Gueguen JA, Makoul G: Patient preferences for shared decisions: A systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 2012, 86:9-18.
4. Hamann J, Mendel R, Buhner M, Kissling W, Cohen R, Knipfer E, Eckstein HH: How should patients behave to facilitate shared decision making - the doctors' view. Health Expect 2011, 30:10-7625.
5. Fogel J, Albert SM, Schnabel F, Ditkoff BA, Neugut AI: Use of the Internet by women with breast cancer. J Med Internet Res 2002, 4(2):e9.
6. Diaz JA, Griffith RA, Ng JJ, Reinert SE, Friedmann PD, Moulton AW: Patients' use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med 2002, 17:180-185.
7. Trotter MI, Morgan DW: Patients' use of the Internet for health related matters: a study of Internet usage in 2000 and 2006. Health Informatics J 2008, 14(3):175-181.
8. Frosch D, May SG, Rendle KAS, Tietbohl C, Elwyn G: Authoritarian physicians and patients' fear of being labelled "difficult" among key obstacles to shared decision-making. Health Aff 2012, 31(5):1030-1038.
9. Sabee CM, Bylund CL, Gueguen Weber J, Sonet E: The association of patients' primary interaction goals with attributions for their doctors' responses in conversations about online health research. J Appl Comm Res 2012, 40(3):271-288.
10. Berkman ND, Davis TC, McCormack L: Health literacy: what is it? J Health Comm 2010, 15(Suppl 2):9-19.
11. Paasche-Orlow MK, Parker RM, Gazmarariam JA, Nielsen-Bohlman LT, Rudd RR: The prevalence of limited health literacy. J Gen Intern Med 2005, 20(2):175-184.
12. van den Haak M, van Hooijdonk C: Evaluating consumer health information Websites: the importance of collecting observational, user-drive data. In International Professional Communication Conference (IPCC). IEEE Xplore Digital Publishers; 2010:333-338.
13. Ericson KA, Simon HA: Protocol analysis: verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1984.
14. Barnum CM: Usability testing and research. New York: Longman; 2002.
15. Van den Haak MJ, de Jong MDT, Schellens JP: Retrospective vs. Concurrent think-aloud protocols: testing usability of an online library catalogue. Behav Inf Technol 2003, 22:339-351.
16. Cotton D, Gresty K: Reflecting on the think-aloud method for evaluating e-learning. Br J Educ Techn 2006, 37:45-54.
17. Davison GC, Vogel RS, Coffman SG: Think-aloud approaches to cognitive assessment and the articulated thoughts in simulated situations paradigm. J Consult Clinl Psychol 1997, 65:950-958.
18. Sadasivam RS, Delaughter K, Crenshaw K, Sobko HJ, Williams JH, Coley HL, Ray MN, Ford DE, Allison JJ, Houston TK: Development of an interactive, web-delivered system to increase provider-patient engagement in smoking cessation. J Med Internet Res 2011, 13(4):e87.
19. Palma D, Senan S: Stereotactic radiation therapy: changing treatment paradigms for stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Curr Opin Oncol 2011, 23(2):133-139.
20. Vansteenkiste J, De Ruysscher D, Eberhardt WE, Lim E, Senan S, Felip E, Peters S: Early and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2013, 24(Suppl 6):vi89-vi98.
21. Faulkner L: Beyond the five-user assumption: benefits of increased sample sizes in usability testing. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 2003, 35(3):379-383.
22. Nielsen J: Estimating the number of subjects needed for a thinking aloud test. Int J Hum Comput Stud 1994, 41(3):385-397.
23. Houts PS, Doak CC, Doak LG, Loscalzo MJ: The role of pictures in improving health communication: a review of research on attention, comprehension, recall and adherence. Patient Educ Couns 2006, 61:173-190.
24. Hawley S, Zikmund-Fisher B, Ubel P, Jancovic A, Lucas T, Fagerlin A: The impact of the format of graphical presentation on health-related knowledge and treatment choices. Patient Educ Couns 2008, 73:448-455.
25. Tait AV, Voepel-Lewis T: The effect of format on parents' understanding of the risks and benefits of clinical research: a comparison between text, tables and graphics. J Health Comm 2010, 15:487-501.
26. Bol N, Smets EMA, Ruthers MM, Burgers JA, de Haes HCJM, van Loos EF, Weert JCM: Do videos improve website satisfaction and recall of online cancer-related information in older lung cancer patients? Patient Educ Couns 2013, 92:404-412.
27. Flesch R: A new readability yardstick. J Appl Psych 1948, 32:221-233.
28. Brouwer RHM: Onderzoek naar de leesmoeilijkheden van Nederlands proza. Pedagogische Studiën 1963, 40:454-464.
29. Chew LD, Bradley KA, Boyko EJ: Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Fam Med 2004, 36:588-594.
30. Chew LD, Griffin JM, Partin MR, Noorbaloochi S, Grill JP, Snyder, Vanryn M: Validation of screening questions for limited health literacy in a large VA outpatient population. J Gen Intern Med 2008, 23:561-566.
31. Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays M: Qualitative research in health care: analysing qualitative data. BMJ 2000, 320:114-116.
32. Green J, Willis K, Hughes E, Small R, Welch N, Gibbs L, Daly J: Generating best evidence from qualitative research: the role of data analysis. Aus N Z J Public Health 2007, 31:545-550.
33. Sandelowski M: Real qualitative researchers do not count: the use of numbers in qualitative research. Res Nurs Health 2001, 24(3):230-240.
34. Haasbeek CJ, Lagerwaard FJ, Slotman BJ, Senan S: Outcomes of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for centrally located early-stage lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2011, 6(12):2036-2043.
35. Shirvani S, Jiang J, Chang J, Welsh JW, Gomez DR, Swisher S, Buchholz TA, Smith BD: Comparative effectiveness of five treatment strategies for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer in the elderly. Intern J of Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012, 84(5):1060-1070.
36. van Weert JC, Bolle S, van Dulmen S, Jansen J: Older cancer patients' information and communication needs: what they want is what they get? Patient Educ Couns 2013, 92(3):388-397.
37. Entwistle V, Williams B, Skea Z, MacLennan G, Bhattacharya S: Which surgical decisions should patients participate in and how? Reflections on women's recollections of discussions about variants of hysterectomy. Soc Sci Med 2006, 62(2):499-509.
38. Nelson JE, Gay EB, Berman AR, Powell CA, Salazar-Schicci J, Wisnivesky JP: Patients rate physician communication about lung cancer. Cancer 2011, 117:5212-5220.
39. Arora NK: Interacting with cancer patients: the significance of physicians' communication behaviour. Soc Sci Med 2003, 57(5):791-806.
40. Hack TF, Degner LF, Parker PA: The communication goals and needs of cancer patients: a review. Psychooncology 2005, 14:831-845.
41. O'Connell RL, Hartridge-Lambert SK, Din N, St John ER, Hitchens C, Johnson T: Patients' understanding of medical terminology used in the breast clinic. Breast 2013, 22(5):836-838.
42. Nijland N, van Gemert-Pijnen J, Boer H, Steehouder MF, Seydel ER: Evaluation of internet-based technology for supporting self-care: problems encountered by patients and caregivers when using self-care applications. J Med Internet Res 2008, 10:e13.
43. Lober WB, Zierler B, Herbaugh A, Shinstrom SE, Stolyar A, Kim EH, Kim Y: Barriers to the use of a personal health record by an elderly population. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2006, 2006:514-518.
44. Davis TC, Crouch MA, Wills G, Miller S, Abdehou DM: The gap between patient reading comprehension and the readability of patient education materials. J Fam Pract 1990, 31:533-538.
45. Keselman A, Smith CA: A classification of errors in lay comprehension of medical documents. J Biomed Inform 2012, 45:1151-1163.
46. Kelly PA, Haidet P: Physician overestimation of patient literacy: a potential source of health care disparities. Patient Educ Couns 2006, 66:119-122.
47. Macabasco-O'Connell A, Fry-Bowers EK: Knowledge and perceptions of health literacy among nursing professionals. J Health Comm 2011, 16:295-307.
48. Cox AC, Fallowfield LJ, Jenkins VA: Communication and informed consent in phase 1 trials: a review of the literature. Support Care Cancer 2006, 14:303-309.
49. Trevena LJ, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Edwards A, Gaissmaier W, Galesic M, Han PKJ, King J, Lawson ML, Linder SM, Lipkus I, Ozanne E, Peters E, Timmermans D, Woloshin S: Presenting quantitative information about decision outcomes: a risk communication primer for patient decision aid developers. BMC Med Inform Dec Mak 2013, 13(Suppl 2):S7.
50. Gigerenzer G, Gaissmaier W, Kurz-Milcke E, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S: Helping doctors and patients to make sense of health statistics. Psychol Sci Public Interest 2007, 8:53-96.
51. Timmermans DRM, Ockhuysen-Vermey CF, Henneman L: Presenting health risk information in different formats: the effect on participants' cognitive and emotional evaluation and decisions. Patient Educ Couns 2008, 73:443-447.
52. Timmermans DRM, Molewijk B, Stiggelbout A, Kievit J: Different formats for communicating surgical risks to patients and the effect on choice of treatment. Patient Educ Couns 2004, 54:255-263.
53. Zipkin DA, Umscheid CA, Keating NL, Allen E, Aung K, Beyth R, Kaatz S, Mann DM, Sussman JB, Schardt DC, Nagi A, Sloane R, Feldstein DA: Evidence based risk-communication: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2014, 161(4):270-280.