Objective: Psychiatric comorbidities are common among cancer patients. However, little is known about the quality of online information regarding these conditions. This study uses a validated tool to systematically determine the strengths and limitations of websites addressing depression in cancer patients.
Methods: The term "depression in cancer patients" was searched online using the search engines Google, Yippy, and Dogpile. A set of predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria was applied to all search results, which yielded 48 websites for inclusion. A validated rating tool was used to score the websites based on the six domains of Affiliation, Accountability, Interactivity, Structure & Organization, Readability, and Content Quality. The results were analyzed using descriptive statistics.
Results: Of the 48 websites evaluated, 50% were commercial. 63% of websites identified authorship, 54% cited reliable sources, 37% provided links, and 38% were updated within the last 2 years. 94% of websites featured a search engine and 60% had at least four structural tools. Average readability was at a grade 12.3 level using the Flesch-Kincaid scale and 11.3 using the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook Index. The most completely and accurately covered topics of depression were symptoms and treatment-83% and 73% respectively. Its prevention and prognosis were not covered by any of the websites.
Conclusions: A validated rating tool was applied to evaluate the quality of online information for depression in cancer patients. Website accountability was poor, readability was often at a level that is too difficult for the lay audience, and the topics of prevention and prognosis were seldom covered.
Keywords: cancer; consumer health information; depression; health education; internet; oncology; patient education.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.