Information about cancer clinical trials: an analysis of Internet resources.

PURPOSE Clinical trials are critical to improving patient outcomes, but participation in cancer clinical trials is low. Patient understanding of clinical trial process is also limited. Patients are increasingly using the Internet as a source of information. It is critical that such Internet-based information is relevant, current, balanced, and easy to access and navigate. We critically reviewed seven international online resources that provide information for patients/consumers regarding cancer clinical trials. METHODS Seven international websites from North America, Europe and Australia were selected based on profile/usage. Sites were evaluated with respect to their content, readability and appropriateness using a suite of standard assessment tools. RESULTS No sites performed well in terms of all assessment criteria. There was substantial variation between sites regarding information provided, content, design and readability. All sites required high literacy levels and assessment using the Standard Assessment of Means tool showed consistent deficiencies. CONCLUSION Although there are numerous websites providing information about cancer clinical trials to patients/consumers, all evaluated sites have several shortcomings. Attention to the content of information, its presentation and the design of Internet resources has an ethical imperative, and is likely to lead to improved patient satisfaction.

[1]  Daniela B. Friedman,et al.  A Systematic Review of Readability and Comprehension Instruments Used for Print and Web-Based Cancer Information , 2006, Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education.

[2]  C. Rees,et al.  Evaluating the reliability of DISCERN: a tool for assessing the quality of written patient information on treatment choices. , 2002, Patient education and counseling.

[3]  Karen M. Emmons,et al.  Accessibility of Web Sites Containing Colorectal Cancer Information to Adults with Limited Literacy (United States) , 2006, Cancer Causes & Control.

[4]  L. G. Doak,et al.  Teaching Patients With Low Literacy Skills , 1985 .

[5]  A K John,et al.  A critical appraisal of internet resources on colorectal cancer , 2006, Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

[6]  Paul Kim,et al.  Published criteria for evaluating health related web sites: review , 1999, BMJ.

[7]  C. Daugherty,et al.  Use of the internet to obtain cancer information among cancer patients at an urban county hospital. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  G. Harry McLaughlin,et al.  SMOG Grading - A New Readability Formula. , 1969 .

[9]  D. Gandara,et al.  Prospective evaluation of cancer clinical trial accrual patterns: identifying potential barriers to enrollment. , 2001, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[10]  Ann Grafstein,et al.  The linguistic assumptions underlying readability formulae , 2001 .

[11]  Thomas Hugh Feeley,et al.  Research Paper: Patient Internet Use for Health Information at Three Urban Primary Care Clinics , 2004, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[12]  P. Philip,et al.  Factors associated with breast cancer clinical trials participation and enrollment at a large academic medical center. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  Alejandro R Jadad,et al.  Examination of instruments used to rate quality of health information on the internet: chronicle of a voyage with an unclear destination , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  C. Chernecky,et al.  Internet design preferences of patients with cancer. , 2006, Oncology nursing forum.

[15]  Valerie Njie,et al.  Internet Usage by Low-Literacy Adults Seeking Health Information: An Observational Analysis , 2004, Journal of medical Internet research.

[16]  D B Friedman,et al.  Health literacy and the World Wide Web: Comparing the readability of leading incident cancers on the Internet , 2006, Medical informatics and the Internet in medicine.

[17]  G. Hortobagyi,et al.  Factors associated with participation in breast cancer treatment clinical trials. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[18]  M. Litwin,et al.  Suitability of prostate cancer education materials: applying a standardized assessment tool to currently available materials. , 2004, Patient education and counseling.

[19]  J. Powell,et al.  Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. , 2002, JAMA.

[20]  D Charnock,et al.  DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. , 1999, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[21]  C. Rees,et al.  Patient information leaflets for prostate cancer: which leaflets should healthcare professionals recommend? , 2003, Patient education and counseling.