Archives

  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2021-03
  • br Several limitations identified in this study include we

    2020-07-27


    Several limitations identified in this P 22077 study, include: (1) we were unable to ascertain which resources are most popular and most frequently visited by caregivers, (2) we did not have context on which resources are currently recommended by physicians, (3) we did not have context on the resources currently available and utilized by cancer centers and hospitals, and (4) we only evaluated English-language resources. These points will need to be addressed in a further study.
    4.2 Conclusion
    This was the first study to evaluate the suitability, readability, quality, and usefulness of the online resources available to cancer caregivers. Overall, study findings suggest that the resources available to cancer
    caregivers are not optimal and fail to address caregivers’ most pressing needs. Of the 55 resources evaluated, Cancer Council Australia’s booklet, Caring for Someone with Cancer (2014 and 2017 Eds.) and the American Cancer Society’s webpages, Caregivers and Families, ranked top three in two of the three assessment categories.
    4.3 Practice Implications
    With the shift in the acquisition of health information from print to online resources, publicly available resources retrievable through popular online search engines should adequately address caregivers’ information needs. Though other forms of information and support are available to cancer caregivers, the findings of this study suggest that there is an urgent need to improve and enhance online resources in the form of webpages, online booklets, and online fact sheets, in order to diminish misinformation and misunderstanding, which can have far-reaching effects on cancer caregivers and the care recipient.Our findings will allow health care professionals to better address the needs of cancer caregivers by recommending information resources that are most appropriate and most likely to meet their unmet care needs.
    Competing interests: the authors have no competing interests to declare
    Funding
    This work was supported by the Kevric Summer Research Bursary, the Dr. Clarke K. McLeod Memorial Scholarship, and the Class of Medicine 1960 Research Bursary. Dr. Lambert was supported by a Canada Research Chair (Tier 2).
    References
    [2] T. Bakas, R.R. Lewis, J.E. Parsons, Caregiving tasks among family caregivers of patients with lung cancer, Oncology Nursing Forum. 28 (2001).
    [3] Y. Kim, R. Schulz, Family caregivers' strains: comparative analysis of cancer caregiving with dementia, diabetes, and frail elderly caregiving, Journal of Aging and Health. 20 (2008) 483-503. [4] C. Nijboer, R. Tempelaar, R. Sanderman, MMANUSCRIPT.Triemstra,‐R.J.Spruijt,G.A.VanDenBos,Cancer and caregiving: the Hybrid DNA impact on the caregiver's health, Psycho Oncology: Journal of the Psychological, Social and Behavioral Dimensions of Cancer, 7 (1998) 3-13.
    [6] K. Hodgkinson, P. Butow, K.M. Hobbs, G.E. Hunt, S.K. Lo, G. Wain, Assessing unmet supportive care needs in partners of cancer survivors: The development and evaluation of the Cancer Survivors' Partners Unmet Needs measure (CaSPUN), Psycho Oncology: Journal of the Psychological, Social and Behavioral Dimensions of Cancer. 16 (2007) 805-813.
    [7] S. Robins, H.J. Barr, R. Idelson, S. Lambert, . Zelkowitz, Online health information regarding male infertility: An evaluation of readability, suitability, and quality, Interactive Journal of Medical Research. 5 (2016) e25. DOI: 10.2196/ijmr.6440
    [8] N. Mcinnes, B.J. Haglund, Readability of online health information: Implications for health literacy, InformaticsACCEPTEDforHealthandSocialCare.36 (2011) 173-189. [9] D. Charnock, S. Shepperd, G. Needham, R. Gann, DISCERN: An instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. 53 (1999) 105-111.
    [10] J. Kaicker, V.B. Debono, W. Dang, N. Buckley, L. Thabane, Assessment of the quality and variability of health information on chronic pain websites using the DISCERN instrument, BMC Medicine. 8 (2010) 59.
    [13] Utilities for online operating system, tests document readability, https://www.online- utility.org/english/readability_test_and_improve.jsp, (accessed November 30, 2017).
    [14] G. Ademiluyi, C.E. Rees, C.E. Sheard, Evaluating the reliability and validity of three tools to assess the quality of health information on the Internet, Patient Education and Counseling. 50 (2003) 151-155.
    [15] D.J. Sheskin, Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures, third ed., Boca Raton, Chapman & Hall Crc, 2004.
    [16] L. Kaufman, P.J. Rousseeuw, Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Cluster Analysis, Hoboken NJ, John Wiley & Sons, 2005.
    [17] P.J. Rousseeuw, Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster-analysis, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics. 20 (1987) 53-65.