Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Cancer Education 3/2015

01-09-2015

Sifting Through It All: Characterizing Melanoma Patients’ Utilization of the Internet as an Information Source

Authors: Sarah Nicole Hamilton, Elena P Scali, Irene Yu, Eva Gusnowski, Paris-Ann Ingledew

Published in: Journal of Cancer Education | Issue 3/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

This study describes how melanoma patients used the Internet as a melanoma information source and how it impacted their clinical encounter and treatment decision. From 2010 to 2013, melanoma patients were invited to complete a 23-question paper survey with open- and close-ended questions. Thirty-one of the 62 patients approached completed the survey. The majority (90 %) of respondents used the Internet as a melanoma information source. Most (90 %) had used the search engine Google. The most commonly searched topics were melanoma treatment (96 %), screening (64 %), and prevention (64 %). While most respondents (85 %) found the Internet was a useful melanoma information source, over half (54 %) found melanoma websites at least somewhat difficult to understand. Many (78 %) believed it increased their understanding of their diagnosis, 71 % thought it influenced their treatment decision, and 59 % felt it impacted their specialist consultation. This study informs health care professionals that many melanoma patients search the Internet for information regarding their diagnosis and that it may impact their disease understanding and treatment decisions.
Literature
3.
go back to reference Huang GJ, Penson DF (2008) Internet health resources and the cancer patient. Cancer Investig 26:202–207CrossRef Huang GJ, Penson DF (2008) Internet health resources and the cancer patient. Cancer Investig 26:202–207CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Hesse B, Nelson D, Kreps G et al. (2005) Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the internet and its implications for health care providers: findings from the First Health Information National Trends Survey. Arch Intern Med 165:2618–2624CrossRefPubMed Hesse B, Nelson D, Kreps G et al. (2005) Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the internet and its implications for health care providers: findings from the First Health Information National Trends Survey. Arch Intern Med 165:2618–2624CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Berland GK, Elliot MN, Morales LS et al. (2001) Health information on the internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA 285:2612–2621PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed Berland GK, Elliot MN, Morales LS et al. (2001) Health information on the internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA 285:2612–2621PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
6.
9.
go back to reference Bichakjian CK, Schwartz JL, Wang TS et al. (2002) Melanoma information on the Internet: often incomplete—a public health opportunity? J Clin Oncol 20:134–141CrossRefPubMed Bichakjian CK, Schwartz JL, Wang TS et al. (2002) Melanoma information on the Internet: often incomplete—a public health opportunity? J Clin Oncol 20:134–141CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Sabel MS, Strecher VJ, Schwartz JL et al. (2005) Patterns of Internet use and impact on patients with melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol 52:779–785CrossRefPubMed Sabel MS, Strecher VJ, Schwartz JL et al. (2005) Patterns of Internet use and impact on patients with melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol 52:779–785CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Harris I (2003) What does “The discovery of grounded theory” have to say to medical education? Adv Health Sci Educ 8:49–61CrossRef Harris I (2003) What does “The discovery of grounded theory” have to say to medical education? Adv Health Sci Educ 8:49–61CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Nguyen SKA, Ingledew P-A (2013) Tangled in the breast cancer web: an evaluation of the usage of web-based information resources by breast cancer patients. J Cancer Educ 28:662–668CrossRefPubMed Nguyen SKA, Ingledew P-A (2013) Tangled in the breast cancer web: an evaluation of the usage of web-based information resources by breast cancer patients. J Cancer Educ 28:662–668CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Quinn EM, Corrigan M, McHugh SM et al. (2012) Breast cancer information on the internet: analysis of accessibility and accuracy. Breast 21:514–517CrossRefPubMed Quinn EM, Corrigan M, McHugh SM et al. (2012) Breast cancer information on the internet: analysis of accessibility and accuracy. Breast 21:514–517CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Beaton C, Codd RJ, Holland P, Gateley CA (2008) Evaluation of the quality and accuracy of information regarding aromatase inhibitors available on the internet. Breast J 14:366–368CrossRefPubMed Beaton C, Codd RJ, Holland P, Gateley CA (2008) Evaluation of the quality and accuracy of information regarding aromatase inhibitors available on the internet. Breast J 14:366–368CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa E-R (2002) Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA 287:2691–2700CrossRefPubMed Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa E-R (2002) Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA 287:2691–2700CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Meric F, Bernstam EV, Mirza NQ et al. (2002) Breast cancer on the world wide web: cross sectional survey of quality of information and popularity of websites. BMJ 324:577–581PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed Meric F, Bernstam EV, Mirza NQ et al. (2002) Breast cancer on the world wide web: cross sectional survey of quality of information and popularity of websites. BMJ 324:577–581PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Killeen S, Hennessey A, El Hassan Y et al. (2011) Gastric cancer-related information on the Internet: incomplete, poorly accessible, and overly commercial. Am J Surg 201:171–178CrossRefPubMed Killeen S, Hennessey A, El Hassan Y et al. (2011) Gastric cancer-related information on the Internet: incomplete, poorly accessible, and overly commercial. Am J Surg 201:171–178CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Grewal P, Alagaratnam S (2013) The quality and readability of colorectal cancer information on the internet. IJSU 11:410–413 Grewal P, Alagaratnam S (2013) The quality and readability of colorectal cancer information on the internet. IJSU 11:410–413
20.
go back to reference Ademiluyi G, Rees CE, Sheard CE (2003) Evaluating the reliability and validity of three tools to assess the quality of health information on the Internet. Patient Educ Couns 50:151–155CrossRefPubMed Ademiluyi G, Rees CE, Sheard CE (2003) Evaluating the reliability and validity of three tools to assess the quality of health information on the Internet. Patient Educ Couns 50:151–155CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R (1999) DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health 53:105–111PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R (1999) DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health 53:105–111PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Eysenbach G, Köhler C (2002) How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ 324:573–577PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed Eysenbach G, Köhler C (2002) How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ 324:573–577PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Scali E, Ingledew P (2011) Melanoma patient information: assessment of the quality of internet-based information resources [abstract]. J Investig Med 59:183–184 Scali E, Ingledew P (2011) Melanoma patient information: assessment of the quality of internet-based information resources [abstract]. J Investig Med 59:183–184
24.
go back to reference Chen X, Siu LL (2001) Impact of the media and the internet on oncology: survey of cancer patients and oncologists in Canada. J Clin Oncol 19:4291–4297PubMed Chen X, Siu LL (2001) Impact of the media and the internet on oncology: survey of cancer patients and oncologists in Canada. J Clin Oncol 19:4291–4297PubMed
25.
go back to reference Gimotty P, Botbyl J, Soong S-J, Guerry D (2005) A population-based validation of the American Joint Committee on Cancer melanoma staging system. J Clin Oncol 23:8065–8075CrossRefPubMed Gimotty P, Botbyl J, Soong S-J, Guerry D (2005) A population-based validation of the American Joint Committee on Cancer melanoma staging system. J Clin Oncol 23:8065–8075CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Gorantla VC, Kirkwood JM (2014) State of melanoma. Hematol Clin NA 28:415–435CrossRef Gorantla VC, Kirkwood JM (2014) State of melanoma. Hematol Clin NA 28:415–435CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Sifting Through It All: Characterizing Melanoma Patients’ Utilization of the Internet as an Information Source
Authors
Sarah Nicole Hamilton
Elena P Scali
Irene Yu
Eva Gusnowski
Paris-Ann Ingledew
Publication date
01-09-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Cancer Education / Issue 3/2015
Print ISSN: 0885-8195
Electronic ISSN: 1543-0154
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-014-0711-1

Other articles of this Issue 3/2015

Journal of Cancer Education 3/2015 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine