The quality of internet sites providing information relating to oral cancer.

To determine the quality of the information available on the internet in relation to oral cancer. Sites were identified using two search engines (Google and Yahoo), and the search term "oral cancer". The first 100 consecutive sites in each search were visited and classified. The websites were evaluated for quality of content by using the validated DISCERN rating instrument and the JAMA benchmarks; the existence of the Health on the Net (HON) seal was also registered. The Google search yielded 25,70,000 sites for oral cancer, while Yahoo yielded 6,99,00,000. We reviewed 29 Google websites and 22 Yahoo websites. Based on the JAMA benchmarks, only two sites (6.9%) met the four criteria in the Google search, versus a single site (4.5%) in the Yahoo search. As regards the DISCERN instrument, no site obtained the maximum score. Moreover, in the Google search, 72.5% of the sites had serious deficiencies, versus 68.2% of the Yahoo sites. Lastly, eight of the Google sites (27.6%) and four of the Yahoo sites (18.2%) presented the HON seal. The quality of the healthcare information related to oral cancer on the internet is poor. There is a need to be vigilant about the quality of information found on the internet.

[1]  P. Boyle,et al.  Rising trends of oral cancer mortality among males worldwide: the return of an old public health problem , 1994, Cancer Causes & Control.

[2]  G. Eysenbach.  The Impact of the Internet on Cancer Outcomes , 2003, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[3]  M. Downer,et al.  The epidemiology of oral cancer. , 1996, The British journal of oral & maxillofacial surgery.

[4]  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.

[5]  Antoine Geissbühler,et al.  Health On the Net Foundation: Assessing the Quality of Health Web Pages All Over the World , 2007, MedInfo.

[6]  J. Atkinson,et al.  Cross sectional survey of patients' satisfaction with information about cancer , 1999, BMJ.

[7]  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.

[8]  M. Winker,et al.  Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet: principles governing AMA web sites. American Medical Association. , 2000, JAMA.

[9]  A R Jadad,et al.  Rating health information on the Internet: navigating to knowledge or to Babel? , 1998, JAMA.

[10]  Petra Wilson,et al.  The quality of health information on the internet , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  S. Singletary,et al.  Breast cancer on the world wide web: cross sectional survey of quality of information and popularity of websites , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  C. la Vecchia,et al.  Trends in oral cancer mortality in Europe. , 2004, Oral oncology.

[13]  Abha Agrawal,et al.  A systematic critique of diabetes on the world wide web for patients and their physicians , 2004, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[14]  J C Wyatt,et al.  Commentary: measuring quality and impact of the world wide web , 1997, BMJ.

[15]  James M. Metz,et al.  Internet utilization by radiation oncology patients , 2001 .

[16]  J. Hiller,et al.  Information and support for women following the primary treatment of breast cancer , 2002, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[17]  J. Saul,et al.  Information needs of patients with cancer: results from a large study in UK cancer centres , 2001, British Journal of Cancer.

[18]  P. Infante-Cossio,et al.  Assessment of quality of life in oral cancer. , 2008, Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal.

[19]  J. Biermann,et al.  Evaluation of cancer information on the Internet , 1999, Cancer.

[20]  J. Young,et al.  What are the information priorities for cancer patients involved in treatment decisions? An experienced surrogate study in Hodgkin's disease. , 1996, British Journal of Cancer.

[21]  A. Jadad,et al.  Analysis of cases of harm associated with use of health information on the internet. , 2002, JAMA.

[22]  L. Siu,et al.  Impact of the media and the internet on oncology: survey of cancer patients and oncologists in Canada. , 2001, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[23]  Petra Wilson,et al.  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. , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

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

[25]  G D Lundberg,et al.  Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor--Let the reader and viewer beware. , 1997, JAMA.

[26]  R. Czaja,et al.  Patient use of treatment‐related information received from the cancer information service , 1993, Cancer.

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