Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prostate Cancer Guidelines on Web 2.0-Based Sites: The Screening Dilemma Continues Online

  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Little is known about prostate cancer (PrCA) screening information on participatory, interactive, and consumer-generated websites collectively referred to as Web 2.0. A content analysis was conducted of PrCA resources on four highly trafficked Web 2.0 social bookmarking sites. A total of 127 webpages were analyzed. Most content was from news websites (48.9%) and blogs (37.8%). PrCA screening was mentioned on 95.3% of pages; only 30.7% discussed the prostate-specific antigen test. Less than half (43.8%) mentioned current screening guidelines. PrCA content is inconsistent on Web 2.0 sites. Future research should assess the readability and usability of Web 2.0 cancer resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Cancer Society (2009) Cancer Facts and Figures 2009. Atlanta, GA

  2. American Cancer Society (2009) Cancer Facts and Figures for African Americans 2009–2010. Atlanta, GA

  3. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (2008) Screening for PrCA: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 149(3):185–191

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barry MJ (2009) Screening for PrCA—the controversy that refuses to die. N Engl J Med 360(13):1351–1354

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Brawley OW (2009) Cancer screening in the United States, 2009: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin 59(1):27–41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. American Cancer Society (2009) Detailed guide: can PrCA be found early? http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_4_3X_Can_prostate_cancer_be_found_early_36.asp?rnav=cri. Accessed 1 Apr 2009

  7. Fox S (2006) Online health search 2006. Pew Internet and American life project, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bright MA, Fleisher L, Thomsen C, Morra ME, Marcus A, Gehring W (2005) Exploring e-Health usage and interest among cancer information service users: the need for personalized interactions and multiple channels remains. J Health Commun 10(Suppl 1):35–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Boulos MN, Wheeler S (2007) The emerging Web 2.0 social software: an enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and health care education. Health Inf Libr J 24(1):2–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Boulos MN, Maramba I, Wheeler S (2006) Wikis, blogs and podcasts: a new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Med Educ 6:41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rainie L (2007) 28% of online Americans have used the internet to tag content. Pew Internet and American life project, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  12. Skiba DJ (2005) Web 2.0: next great thing or just marketing hype? Nurs Educ Perspect 26(2):212–214

    Google Scholar 

  13. Seeman N (2008) Web 2.0 and chronic illness: new horizons, new opportunities. Healthc Q 11(1):104–108, 110

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tanner A, Friedman DB, Koskan A, Barr D (2009) Disaster communication on the Internet: a focus on mobilizing information. J Health Commun 14(8):741–755

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Friedman DB, Hoffman-Goetz L, Arocha JF (2006) Health literacy and the World Wide Web: comparing the readability of leading incident cancers on the Internet. Med Inform Internet Med 31(1):67–87

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Friedman DB, Kao EK (2008) A comprehensive assessment of the difficulty level and cultural sensitivity of online cancer prevention resources for older minority men. Prev Chronic Dis 5(1):Epub

  17. Mathews AE, Laditka SB, Laditka JN, Friedman DB (2009) What are the top-circulating magazines in the United States telling older adults about cognitive health? Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen 24(4):302–312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ostry A, Young ML, Hughes M (2008) The quality of nutritional information available on popular Websites: a content analysis. Health Educ Res 23(4):648–655

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Friedman DB, Hoffman-Goetz L (2003) Cancer coverage in North American publications targeting seniors. J Cancer Educ 18(1):43–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Friedman DB, Hoffman-Goetz L, Arocha JF (2004) Readability of cancer information on the internet. J Cancer Educ 19(2):117–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Campo S, Mastin T (2007) Placing the burden on the individual: overweight and obesity in African American and mainstream women’s magazines. Health Commun 22(3):229–240

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Friedman DB, Corwin SJ, Dominick G, Rose ID (2009) African American men’s understanding and perceptions about PrCA: Why multiple dimensions of health literacy are important in cancer communication. J Community Health 34(5):449–460

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Friedman DB, Corwin SJ, Rose ID, Dominick GM (2009) PrCA communication strategies recommended by older African American men in South Carolina: a qualitative analysis. J Cancer Educ 24(3):204–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bennett GG, Glasgow RE (2009) The delivery of public health interventions via the Internet: actualizing their potential. Annu Rev Public Health 30:273–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 800 Sumter Street, Room 220B, Columbia, SC, 29208, USA

    Daniela B. Friedman, Alexis Koskan & India D. Rose

Authors
  1. Daniela B. Friedman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexis Koskan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. India D. Rose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniela B. Friedman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Friedman, D.B., Koskan, A. & Rose, I.D. Prostate Cancer Guidelines on Web 2.0-Based Sites: The Screening Dilemma Continues Online. J Canc Educ 26, 188–193 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-010-0180-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-010-0180-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation