Quality of Online Information on Multiple Myeloma Available for Laypersons.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Staemmler H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9324394 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the quality of information available online for abortion self-referral and to determine whether quality varies by region or distance to an abortion provider. METHODS:This was a cross-sectional study. We used a standard protocol to perform internet searches from August 2016 to June 2017 for abortion services in the 25 most populous U.S. cities and the 43 state capitals that were not one of the 25 most populous cities. We classified the first 10 webpage results and the first five map results and advertisements as facilitating abortion referral (local independent abortion provider, local Planned Parenthood facility, national abortion provider or organization, prochoice website, or abortion directory), not facilitating abortion referral (nonproviding physician office, nonmedical website, abortion provider greater than 50 miles from the location, news article, general directory, other), or hindering abortion referral (crisis pregnancy center or antichoice website). We used U.S. Census Bureau subregions to examine geographic differences. We made comparisons using a ? test. RESULTS:Overall, from 612 searches from 68 cities, 52.9% of webpage results, 67.3% of map results, and 34.4% of advertisements facilitated abortion referral, whereas 12.9%, 21.7%, and 29.9%, respectively, hindered abortion referral. The content of the searches differed significantly based on U.S. Census Bureau subregion (all P?.001) and distance to an abortion provider (all P?.02). CONCLUSION:Two thirds of map results facilitated abortion self-referral, whereas only half of webpage results did so. Advertisements were the least likely to facilitate and the most likely to hinder self-referral. Quality was lowest in areas that were farthest from abortion providers.
| S-EPMC6249052 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common blood cancer. Treatments for MM include corticosteroids, alkylating agents, anthracyclines, proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, histone deacetylase inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies. Survival outcomes have improved substantially due to the introduction of many of these drugs allied with their rational use. Nonetheless, MM patients successively relapse after one or more treatment regimens or become refractory, mostly due to drug resistance. This review focuses on the main drugs used in MM treatment and on causes of drug resistance, including cytogenetic, genetic and epigenetic alterations, abnormal drug transport and metabolism, dysregulation of apoptosis, autophagy activation and other intracellular signaling pathways, the presence of cancer stem cells, and the tumor microenvironment. Furthermore, we highlight the areas that need to be further clarified in an attempt to identify novel therapeutic targets to counteract drug resistance in MM patients.
| S-EPMC7072128 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOver 20,000 parents in the United States face the challenge of participating in decisions about whether to use life support for their infants born on the cusp of viability every year. Clinicians must help families grasp complex medical information about their baby's immediate prognosis as well as the risk for significant long-term morbidity. Patients faced with this decision want supplemental information and frequently seek medical information on the Internet. Empirical evidence about the quality of websites is lacking.ObjectiveWe sought to evaluate the quality of online information available about periviable birth and treatment options for infants born at the cusp of viability.MethodsWe read a counseling script to 20 pregnant participants that included information typically provided by perinatal and neonatal providers when periviable birth is imminent. The women were then asked to list terms they would use to search the Internet if they wanted additional information. Using these search terms, two reviewers evaluated the content of websites obtained via a Google search. We used two metrics to assess the quality of websites. The first was the DISCERN instrument, a validated questionnaire designed to assess the quality of patient-targeted health information for treatment choices. The second metric was the Essential Content Tool (ECT), a tool designed to address key components of counseling around periviable birth as outlined by professional organizations. DISCERN scores were classified as low quality if scores were 2, fair quality if scores were 3, and high quality if scores were 4 or higher. Scores of 6 or higher on the ECT were considered high quality. Interreviewer agreement was assessed by calculated kappa statistic.ResultsA total of 97 websites were reviewed. Over half (57/97, 59%) were for-profit sites, news stories, or personal blogs; 28% (27/97) were government or medical sites; and 13% (13/97) were nonprofit or advocacy sites. The majority of sites scored poorly in DISCERN questions designed to assess the reliability of information presented as well as data regarding treatment choices. Only 7% (7/97) of the websites were high quality as defined by the DISCERN tool. The majority of sites did not address the essential content defined by the ECT. Importantly, only 18% of websites (17/97) indicated that there are often a number of reasonable approaches to newborn care when faced with periviable birth. Agreement was strong, with kappa ranging from .72 to .91.ConclusionsMost information about periviable birth found on the Internet using common search strategies is of low quality. News stories highlighting positive outcomes are disproportionately represented. Few websites discuss comfort care or how treatment decisions impact quality of life.
| S-EPMC6716431 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe written format and literacy competence of screen-based texts can interfere with the perceived trustworthiness of health information in online forums, independent of the semantic content. Unlike in professional content, the format in unmoderated forums can regularly hint at incivility, perceived as deliberate rudeness or casual disregard toward the reader, for example, through spelling errors and unnecessary emphatic capitalization of whole words (online shouting).ObjectiveThis study aimed to quantify the comparative effects of spelling errors and inappropriate capitalization on ratings of trustworthiness independently of lay insight and to determine whether these changes act synergistically or additively on the ratings.MethodsIn web-based experiments, 301 UK-recruited participants rated 36 randomized short stimulus excerpts (in the format of information from an unmoderated health forum about multiple sclerosis) for trustworthiness using a semantic differential slider. A total of 9 control excerpts were compared with matching error-containing excerpts. Each matching error-containing excerpt included 5 instances of misspelling, or 5 instances of inappropriate capitalization (shouting), or a combination of 5 misspelling plus 5 inappropriate capitalization errors. Data were analyzed in a linear mixed effects model.ResultsThe mean trustworthiness ratings of the control excerpts ranged from 32.59 to 62.31 (rating scale 0-100). Compared with the control excerpts, excerpts containing only misspellings were rated as being 8.86 points less trustworthy, those containing inappropriate capitalization were rated as 6.41 points less trustworthy, and those containing the combination of misspelling and capitalization were rated as 14.33 points less trustworthy (P<.001 for all). Misspelling and inappropriate capitalization show an additive effect.ConclusionsDistinct indicators of incivility independently and additively penalize the perceived trustworthiness of online text independently of lay insight, eliciting a medium effect size.
| S-EPMC7315370 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA wide range of novel psychoactive substances (NPS) is regularly searched and discussed online by web-based drug enthusiasts (i.e. the e-psychonauts). Among NPS, the range of synthetic cannabinoids (SC; 'Spice') currently represents a challenge for governments and clinicians.MethodsUsing a web crawler (i.e. the NPS.Finder®), the present study aimed at assessing psychonauts' fora/platforms to better understand the online mentions of SC.ResultsThe open-web crawling/navigating software identified here some 1,103 synthetic cannabinoids. Of these, 863 molecules were not listed in either the international or the European NPS databases.ConclusionA web crawling approach helped here in identifying a large range of unknown SC likely to possess a misuse potential. Most of these novel/emerging molecules are still relatively unknown. This is a reason for concern; each of these analogues potentially presents different toxicodynamic profiles and there is a lack of docking, preclinical, and clinical observations. Strengthening multidisciplinary collaboration between clinicians and bioinformatics may prove useful in better assessing SC-associated public health risks.
| S-EPMC7709145 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveAssessment of the readability and quality of online health information regarding parathyroidectomy.Study designCross-sectional analysis.SettingWebsites providing patient-oriented health information regarding parathyroidectomy obtained via the Google search engine.MethodsThe top 75 Google search results for "parathyroidectomy,""parathyroid surgery," and "parathyroid gland removal" were reviewed. Websites were categorized by website type and country of origin. Readability was assessed by Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook. Website quality was assessed per JAMA benchmark criteria and the DISCERN instrument.ResultsA total of 74 unique websites were evaluated. The mean readability of the assessed websites exceeded the recommended sixth-grade reading level on the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (P < .001). Readability did not vary significantly by website type. Websites originating from the United Kingdom were significantly more readable than those from the United States. The majority of assessed websites were of poor quality (n = 42, 56.8%) on assessment based on the DISCERN instrument. Quality varied significantly by website category on the JAMA benchmark criteria (P < .001) and DISCERN score (P = .049) with commercial websites receiving the highest scores. DISCERN score also varied significantly by country of origin (P = .036) with UK sites receiving highest mean DISCERN scores.ConclusionOnline health information regarding parathyroidectomy is largely of poor quality and is poorly readable for many patients. Institutions utilizing well-defined guidelines for development of patient educational resources may provide online health information of greater quality and readability.
| S-EPMC9597036 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Online health forums are widely used, but the quality of advice differs as much as the knowledge backgrounds of the audience members who receive the advice. It is important to understand how people judge the information given online. In line with the communication accommodation theory (CAT), online forums represent specific social contexts of communication which can present either accommodative or nonaccommodative language to an audience. Accordingly, use of accommodative or nonaccommodative language might affect people's perceived trust in the communicator. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to investigate how experts who use accommodative (vs nonaccommodative) language are evaluated by passive users of an online forum. METHODS:Participants (n=98) took part in an online experiment and read experts' posts about 10 nutrition myths. Following a 2 x 2 mixed design, experts' posts were written using either low or high amounts of medical technical jargon (MTJ) (within factor) and were directed at different audiences (mainly other medical experts [in a professional forum] vs a user group mainly comprising laypersons [in an advisory forum]) (between factor). Accommodation occurred where experts used high amounts of MTJ to address other medical experts in the professional forum; it also occurred when experts used low amounts of MTJ to address laypersons in the advisory forum. Conversely, nonaccommodation occurred when experts used high amounts of MTJ in the advisory forum and low amounts of MTJ in the professional forum. In each condition, participants evaluated the credibility of the information, the trustworthiness of the experts, and the accommodation by the experts. RESULTS:Overall, participants judged the credibility of information to be higher when experts used MTJ that was accommodative to the designated audience, F1,95=3.10, P=.04, ?p2=.031. In addition, participants judged the experts in professional forums to be more trustworthy than experts in advisory forums (all F1,96?3.54, P ?.03, ?p2?.036). Moreover, participants rated experts who used high amounts of MTJ to have higher competence (F1,96=37.54, P<.001, ?p2=.28], lower integrity (F1,96=10.77, P=.001, ?p2=.101), and lower benevolence (F1,96=9.75, P=.002, ?p2=.092), as well as to have lower perceived accommodation to the audience (all F1,96?72.17, P<.001, ?p2?.43) compared with experts who used low MTJ. CONCLUSIONS:To provide health information online that is perceived as credible, experts should consider using similar language as the language used by the addressed audience. As it is often impossible to determine the exact makeup of an online audience, further research might investigate whether having experts explicitly declare which audience they intend to address can help people to more reliably assess an expert's trustworthiness. Furthermore, as people assess information differently depending on the context of online communication, it would be valuable for research to consider other aspects of the context beyond those of the audience.
| S-EPMC5801514 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study Design An Internet-based evaluation of Web sites regarding lumbar fusion. Objective The Internet has become a major resource for patients; however, the quality and readability of Internet information regarding lumbar fusion is unclear. The objective of this study is to evaluate the quality and readability of Internet information regarding lumbar fusion and to determine whether these measures changed with Web site modality, complexity of the search term, or Health on the Net Code of Conduct certification. Methods Using five search engines and three different search terms of varying complexity ("low back fusion," "lumbar fusion," and "lumbar arthrodesis"), we identified and reviewed 153 unique Web site hits for information quality and readability. Web sites were specifically analyzed by search term and Web site modality. Information quality was evaluated on a 5-point scale. Information readability was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid score for reading grade level. Results The average quality score was low. The average reading grade level was nearly six grade levels above that recommended by National Work Group on Literacy and Health. The quality and readability of Internet information was significantly dependent on Web site modality. The use of more complex search terms yielded information of higher reading grade level but not higher quality. Conclusions Higher-quality information about lumbar fusion conveyed using language that is more readable by the general public is needed on the Internet. It is important for health care providers to be aware of the information accessible to patients, as it likely influences their decision making regarding care.
| S-EPMC4771515 | biostudies-other
Project description:Purpose Hyperacusis is a disorder characterized by reduced sound tolerance leading to ear pain, emotional distress, and reduced quality of life. Many people with hyperacusis turn to the Internet for information and support from online communities to discuss their condition. The purpose of this study was to assess the content and quality of hyperacusis information presented online. Method The three most used Internet search engines were used to identify relevant websites using the single search term hyperacusis. Fifteen websites were selected for analysis. Details of the purpose, audience, and content of each website were extracted using a bespoke data extraction form. The quality of the information on each website was rated using the validated DISCERN questionnaire. Results There was a wide disparity in the quality and content of hyperacusis information across websites. The website Hyperacusis Focus achieved the highest overall DISCERN score. Hyperacusis Focus and U.K. National Health Service websites were the most comprehensive online resources for health care professionals and patients, respectively. Wikipedia was judged useful for both health care professionals and patients. In general, hyperacusis-related information was accurate. However, no single website provided a complete account of hyperacusis, and some were judged to be selective in the information they provided. Conclusions The Internet provides an important source of information for those who have hyperacusis and those who care for them. Revisions to the websites reviewed here are needed for each to provide a complete account of hyperacusis. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12869717.
| S-EPMC7838831 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The role and mechanism of circRFWD2 in the multiple myeloma,
2021-12-01 | PXD030089 |