Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer 12/2017

05.07.2017 | Original Article

A cross sectional review of patient information available in the World Wide Web on CyberKnife: fallacies and pitfalls

verfasst von: Durgapoorna Menon, Prameela G. Chelakkot, Devika Sunil, Ashwini Lakshmaiah

Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Ausgabe 12/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to assess the quality of videos available in YouTube on CyberKnife.

Methods

The term “CyberKnife” was input into the search window of www.​youtube.​com on a specific date and the first 50 videos were assessed for technical and content issues. The data was tabulated and analysed.

Results

The search yielded 32,300 videos in 0.33 s. Among the first 50 analysed, most were professional videos, mostly on CyberKnife in general and for brain tumours. Most of the videos did not mention anything about patient selection or lesion size. The other technical details were covered by most although they seemed muffled by the animations. Many patient videos were recordings of one entire treatment, thus giving future patients an insight on what to expect. Almost half the videos projected glorified views about the treatment technique.

Conclusions

The company videos were reasonably accurate and well presented as were many institutional videos, although there was a tendency to gloss over a few points. The glorification of the treatment technique was a disturbing finding. The profound trust of the patients on the health care system is humbling.
Literatur
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Kushnirsky M, Patel V, Schulder M (2015) The history of stereotactic radiosurgery. In: Chin L, Regine W (eds) Principles and practice of stereotactic radiosurgery, 2nd edn. Springer International Publishing, pp. 3–10 Kushnirsky M, Patel V, Schulder M (2015) The history of stereotactic radiosurgery. In: Chin L, Regine W (eds) Principles and practice of stereotactic radiosurgery, 2nd edn. Springer International Publishing, pp. 3–10
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Cheng W, Adler JR (2006) An overview of Cyberknife radiosurgery. Chin J Clin Oncol 3(4):229–243CrossRef Cheng W, Adler JR (2006) An overview of Cyberknife radiosurgery. Chin J Clin Oncol 3(4):229–243CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Pennbridge J, Rita Moya LR (1999) Questionnaire survey of California consumers’ use and rating of sources of health care information including the Internet. West J Med 171:302–305PubMedPubMedCentral Pennbridge J, Rita Moya LR (1999) Questionnaire survey of California consumers’ use and rating of sources of health care information including the Internet. West J Med 171:302–305PubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Peterson G, Aslani P, Williams KA (2003) How do consumers search for and appraise information on medicines on the Internet? A qualitative study using focus groups. J Med Internet Res 5(4):e33CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Peterson G, Aslani P, Williams KA (2003) How do consumers search for and appraise information on medicines on the Internet? A qualitative study using focus groups. J Med Internet Res 5(4):e33CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Childs S (2004) Developing health website quality assessment guidelines for the voluntary sector: outcomes from the Judge Project. Health Inf Libr J 21:14–26CrossRef Childs S (2004) Developing health website quality assessment guidelines for the voluntary sector: outcomes from the Judge Project. Health Inf Libr J 21:14–26CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Zuk G, Palma AF, Eylert G, Raptis DA, Guggenheim M, Shafighi M (2016) Systematic review of quality of patient information on liposuction in the Internet. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 4(6):e759CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Zuk G, Palma AF, Eylert G, Raptis DA, Guggenheim M, Shafighi M (2016) Systematic review of quality of patient information on liposuction in the Internet. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 4(6):e759CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Res MI, Originally C, Commons C, License A (2002) eEurope 2002: quality criteria for health related websites. J Med Internet Res 4(3):72–91 Res MI, Originally C, Commons C, License A (2002) eEurope 2002: quality criteria for health related websites. J Med Internet Res 4(3):72–91
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Aeree S, Mee-Kyung S (2001) Evaluating health information sites on the .Internet in Korea: a cross-sectional survey. Asia Pac J Public Health 13(Suppl):S19–S22PubMed Aeree S, Mee-Kyung S (2001) Evaluating health information sites on the .Internet in Korea: a cross-sectional survey. Asia Pac J Public Health 13(Suppl):S19–S22PubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Joshi A, Mehta S, Talati K, Malhotra B, Grover A (2013) Evaluation of metabolic syndrome related health information on internet in Indian context. Technol Health Care 21(1):19–30PubMed Joshi A, Mehta S, Talati K, Malhotra B, Grover A (2013) Evaluation of metabolic syndrome related health information on internet in Indian context. Technol Health Care 21(1):19–30PubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Tan MLH, Kok K, Ganesh V, Thomas SS (2014) Patient information on breast reconstruction in the era of the World Wide Web. A snapshot analysis of information available on youtube.com. Breast 23(1):33–37CrossRefPubMed Tan MLH, Kok K, Ganesh V, Thomas SS (2014) Patient information on breast reconstruction in the era of the World Wide Web. A snapshot analysis of information available on youtube.com. Breast 23(1):33–37CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
A cross sectional review of patient information available in the World Wide Web on CyberKnife: fallacies and pitfalls
verfasst von
Durgapoorna Menon
Prameela G. Chelakkot
Devika Sunil
Ashwini Lakshmaiah
Publikationsdatum
05.07.2017
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Ausgabe 12/2017
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3807-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2017

Supportive Care in Cancer 12/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Update Onkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.