Gastric cancer–related information on the Internet: incomplete, poorly accessible, and overly commercial

• Published in: The American journal of surgery 2011-02, Vol.201 (2), p.171-178
• Main Authors: Killeen, Shane, M.D., M.R.C.S.I, Hennessey, Arthur, M.B., B.A.O., Mc.H, El Hassan, Yahear, M.B., B.A.O., Mc.H, Killeen, Kelvin, B.Sc., C.S, Clarke, Nick, M.R.C.S.I., M.Ch, Murray, Kevin, M.D., F.R.C.S, Waldron, Brian, M.D., F.R.C.S
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Accessibility; Accuracy; Audits; Biological and medical sciences; Cancer; Commerce; Completeness; Comprehension; Disclosure; Gastric cancer; Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen; General aspects; Handicapped accessibility; Humans; Information Dissemination - methods; Information sources; Information technology; Internet; Internet - standards; Labels; Literacy; Logos; Medical sciences; Oncology; Patient education; Patient Education as Topic - methods; Patient Education as Topic - standards; Patient information; Quality; Readability; Reading comprehension; Reliability analysis; Search Engine; Search engines; Stomach; Stomach Neoplasms; Stomach. Duodenum. Small intestine. Colon. Rectum. Anus; Surgery; Tumors; Violations; Websites; World Wide Web
• ISSN: 0002-9610; 1879-1883
• DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.12.015

Abstract Background Patients increasingly use the Internet for gastric cancer information. However, the quality of the information is questionable. We evaluated the accuracy, completeness, accessibility, reliability, and readability of gastric cancer websites. Methods The Internet was searched for the terms “gastric cancer” or “stomach cancer” using general search engines. Websites were evaluated for completeness (CS) and accuracy (AS) using predefined quality appraisal instruments (QAIs), reliability using an integrity score (IS), readability using the Flesch-Kincaid (FK) grade level, and accessibility using automated accessibility appraisal tools. Site sponsor and the presence of quality labels were noted. Results Fifty-one websites were evaluated. The mean CS was 100.3 (SD ±44.9), AS was 107.22 (SD ±47.9), IS was 15.3 (SD ±3.7), and the mean readability grade level was 10.4 (SD ±2.5). Only 5 websites had the minimum mandatory basic accessibility. Commercial sites and sites with quality labels had significantly more accessibility violations. Conclusions Internet gastric cancer information is overtly commercial, generally incomplete, and poorly accessible.