• Zhao Y, Zhang J. Consumer health information seeking in social media: a literature review. Health Info Libr J. 2017;34(4):268–83.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Beaunoyer E, Arsenault M, Lomanowska AM, Guitton MJ. Understanding online health information: evaluation, tools, and strategies. Patient Educ Couns. 2017;100(2):183–9.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Tan SS-L, Goonawardene N. Internet health information seeking and the patient-physician relationship: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(1):e9.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Lee HY, Jin SW, Henning-Smith C, Lee J, Lee J. Role of health literacy in health-related information-seeking behavior online: cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(1):e14088.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Nangsangna RD, da-Costa Vroom F. Factors influencing online health information seeking behaviour among patients in Kwahu West Municipal, Nkawkaw, Ghana. Online J Public Health Inform. 2019;11(2).

  • Waks AG, Winer EP. Breast cancer treatment: a review. JAMA. 2019;321(3):288–300.

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Monticciolo DL, Newell MS, Hendrick RE, Helvie MA, Moy L, Monsees B, et al. Breast cancer screening for average-risk women: recommendations from the ACR commission on breast imaging. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017;14(9):1137–43.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ahmad A, editor. Breast cancer metastasis and drug resistance: challenges and progress. Cham: Springer; 2019. (Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology; vol. 1152).

  • Arif N, Ghezzi P. Quality of online information on breast cancer treatment options. The Breast. 2018;1(37):6–12.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Jia X, Pang Y, Liu LS. Online health information seeking behavior: a systematic review. Healthcare (Basel). 2021;9(12):1740.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chua GP, Tan HK, Gandhi M. Information sources and online information seeking behaviours of cancer patients in Singapore. Ecancermedicalscience. 2018;31(12):880.


    Google Scholar
     

  • Alnaim L. Evaluation breast cancer information on the internet in Arabic. J Cancer Educ. 2019;34(4):810–8.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Abdul-Sater Z, Shamseddine A, Taher A, Fouad F, Abu-Sitta G, Fadhil I, et al. Cancer Registration in the Middle East, North Africa, and Turkey: Scope and Challenges. JCO Glob Oncol. 2021;7:GO.21.00065.

  • Taha Z, Eltom SE. The role of diet and lifestyle in women with breast cancer: an update review of related research in the Middle East. Biores Open Access. 2018;7(1):73–80.

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Fares J, Khachfe HH, Fares MY, Salhab HA, Fares Y. Conflict Medicine IN the Arab world. In: Laher I, editor. Handbook of healthcare in the Arab world. Cham: Springer; 2020. p. 1–16.


    Google Scholar
     

  • Fearon D, Hughes S, Brearley SG. Experiences of breast cancer in Arab countries. A thematic synthesis. Qual Life Res. 2020;29(2):313–24.

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Johnson RH, Anders CK, Litton JK, Ruddy KJ, Bleyer A. Breast cancer in adolescents and young adults. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2018;28:e27397.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hashim MJ, Al-Shamsi FA, Al-Marzooqi NA, Al-Qasemi SS, Mokdad AH, Khan G. Burden of breast cancer in the Arab world: findings from global burden of disease, 2016. J Epidemiol Global Health. 2018;8(1):54–8.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • AlHarthi FS, Qari A, Edress A, Abedalthagafi M. Familial/inherited cancer syndrome: a focus on the highly consanguineous Arab population. npj Genomic Med. 2020;5(1):1–10.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Alsaraireh A, Darawad MW. Impact of a breast cancer educational program on female university students’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices. J Cancer Educ. 2019;34(2):315–22.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kher A, Johnson S, Griffith R. Readability assessment of online patient education material on congestive heart failure. Adv Prev Med. 2017;2017:9780317.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • de Man AM, Rashedi A, Nelen W, Anazodo A, Rademaker A, de Roo S, et al. Female fertility in the cancer setting: availability and quality of online health information. Hum Fertil. 2020;23(3):170–8.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Weiss KD, Vargas CR, Ho OA, Chuang DJ, Weiss J, Lee BT. Readability analysis of online resources related to lung cancer. J Surg Res. 2016;206(1):90–7.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Valizadeh-Haghi S, Rahmatizadeh S. Evaluation of the quality and accessibility of available websites on kidney transplantation. Urol J. 2018;15(5):261–5.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kittana N, Hattab S. Quality of online information on type 2 diabetes mellitus in Arabic language websites. Palest Med Pharm J. 2019;29:5.


    Google Scholar
     

  • Maddock C, Camporesi S, Lewis I, Ahmad K, Sullivan R. Online information as a decision making aid for cancer patients: recommendations from the Eurocancercoms project. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(7):1055–9.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Alhuwail D, AlMeraj Z, Boujarwah F. Evaluating hospital websites in Kuwait to improve consumer engagement and access to health information: a cross-sectional analytical study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2018;18(1):82.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Wang X, Cheng Z. Cross-sectional studies: strengths, weaknesses, and recommendations. Chest. 2020;158(1S):S65-71.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Google Trends [Internet]. Google Trends. [cited 2022 Apr 6]. https://trends.google.com/trends/?geo=KW.

  • Al-Ak’hali MS, Fageeh HN, Halboub E, Alhajj MN, Ariffin Z. Quality and readability of web-based Arabic health information on periodontal disease. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021;21(1):41.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rovetta A, Bhagavathula AS. COVID-19-related web search behaviors and infodemic attitudes in Italy: infodemiological study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020;6(2):e19374.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Quintanilha LF, Souza LN, Sanches D, Demarco RS, Fukutani KF. The impact of cancer campaigns in Brazil: a Google Trends analysis. Ecancermedicalscience. 2019;24:13.


    Google Scholar
     

  • Kwan Z, Yong SS, Robinson S. Analysis of Internet searches using Google Trends to measure interest in sun protection and skin cancer in selected South-East Asian populations. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed. 2020;36(2):83–9.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hamzehei R, Ansari M, Rahmatizadeh S, Valizadeh-Haghi S. Websites as a tool for public health education: determining the trustworthiness of health websites on Ebola disease. Online J Public Health Inform. 2018;10(3):e221.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Nghiem AZ, Mahmoud Y, Som R. Evaluating the quality of internet information for breast cancer. The Breast. 2016;1(25):34–7.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Alakhali MS. Quality assessment of information on oral cancer provided at arabic speaking websites. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2020;21(4):961–6.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chang KL, Grubbs EG, Ingledew P-A. An analysis of the quality of thyroid cancer websites. Endocr Pract. 2019;25(10):1003–11.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Lynch NP, Lang B, Angelov S, McGarrigle SA, Boyle TJ, Al-Azawi D, et al. Breast reconstruction post mastectomy—let’s google it. accessibility, readability and quality of online information. The Breast. 2017;32:126–9.

  • IDI Web Accessibility Checker: Web Accessibility Checker [Internet]. [cited 2022 Apr 6]. https://achecker.ca/checker/index.php.

  • WAVE Web Accessibility Evaluation Tool [Internet]. [cited 2022 Apr 6]. https://wave.webaim.org/.

  • Abascal J, Arrue M, Valencia X. Tools for web accessibility evaluation. In: Yesilada Y, Harper S, editors. Web accessibility: a foundation for research. London: Springer; 2019. p. 479–503. (Human–Computer Interaction Series).

  • Initiative (WAI) WWA. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Overview [Internet]. Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). [cited 2022 Apr 6]. https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/.

  • AlMeraj Z, Boujarwah F, Alhuwail D, Qadri R. Evaluating the accessibility of higher education institution websites in the State of Kuwait: empirical evidence. Univ Access Inf Soc. 2020 Apr 15.

  • Aghasiyev R, Yılmaz BŞ. The accuracy of information about orthodontics available on the internet. Turk J Orthod. 2018;31(4):127–32.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ahmi A, Mohamad R. Evaluating accessibility of Malaysian public universities websites using achecker and WAVE. Rochester: Social Science Research Network; 2016. Report No.: ID 3550314.

  • Ismail A, Kuppusamy KS. Accessibility of Indian universities’ homepages: an exploratory study. J King Saud Univ Comput Inf Sci. 2018;30(2):268–78.


    Google Scholar
     

  • Alsaeedi A. Comparing web accessibility evaluation tools and evaluating the accessibility of webpages: proposed frameworks. Information. 2020;11(1):40.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Tulbert BH, Snyder CW, Brodell RT. Readability of patient-oriented online dermatology resources. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2011;4(3):27–33.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Edmunds MR, Barry RJ, Denniston AK. Readability assessment of online ophthalmic patient information. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013;131(12):1610–6.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Alhajj MN, Mashyakhy M, Ariffin Z, Ab-Ghani Z, Johari Y, Salim NS. Quality and readability of web-based Arabic health information on denture hygiene: an infodemiology study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020;21(9):956–60.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Monton O, Lambert S, Belzile E, Mohr-Elzeki D. An evaluation of the suitability, readability, quality, and usefulness of online resources for family caregivers of patients with cancer. Patient Educ Couns. 2019;102(10):1892–7.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Boztas N, Omur D, Ozbılgın S, Altuntas G, Piskin E, Ozkardesler S, et al. Readability of internet-sourced patient education material related to “labour analgesia”. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96(45).

  • Website certification guidelines [Internet]. Health On the Net. [cited 2022 Apr 6]. https://www.hon.ch/en/guidelines-honcode.html.

  • Banasiak NC, Meadows-Oliver M. Evaluating asthma websites using the Brief DISCERN instrument. J Asthma Allergy. 2017;16(10):191–6.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cuan-Baltazar JY, Muñoz-Perez MJ, Robledo-Vega C, Pérez-Zepeda MF, Soto-Vega E. Misinformation of COVID-19 on the Internet: infodemiology Study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020;6(2):e18444.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Perra A, Preti A, De Lorenzo V, Nardi AE, Carta MG. Quality of information of websites dedicated to obesity: a systematic search to promote high level of information for Internet users and professionals. Eat Weight Disord. 2021.

  • Akgül Y. Accessibility, usability, quality performance, and readability evaluation of university websites of Turkey: a comparative study of state and private universities. Univ Access Inf Soc. 2021;20(1):157–70.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 [Internet]. [cited 2022 Apr 6]. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/.

  • Quinn EM, Corrigan MA, McHugh SM, Murphy D, O’Mullane J, Hill ADK, et al. Breast cancer information on the internet: analysis of accessibility and accuracy. Breast. 2012;21(4):514–7.

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Basch CH, MacLean SA, Garcia P, Basch CE. Readability of online breast cancer information. Breast J. 2019;25(3):562–3.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Miles RC, Baird GL, Choi P, Falomo E, Dibble EH, Garg M. Readability of online patient educational materials related to breast lesions requiring surgery. Radiology. 2019;291(1):112–8.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Evaluation of the quality and readability of online information about breast cancer in China. Patient Education and Counseling. 2020.

  • Equality Act 2010: how it might affect you [Internet]. GOV.UK. [cited 2022 Apr 6]. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/equality-act-guidance.

  • Introduction to the ADA [Internet]. [cited 2022 Apr 6]. https://www.ada.gov/ada_intro.htm.

  • Alajarmeh N. Evaluating the accessibility of public health websites: an exploratory cross-country study. Univ Access Inf Soc. 2021.

  • Alismail S, Chipidza W. Accessibility evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine registration websites across the United States. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021;28(9):1990–5.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hillyer GC, Beauchemin M, Garcia P, Kelsen M, Brogan FL, Schwartz GK, et al. Readability of cancer clinical trials websites. Cancer Control. 2020;27(1):1073274819901125.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hutchinson N, Baird GL, Garg M. Examining the reading level of internet medical information for common internal medicine diagnoses. Am J Med. 2016;129(6):637–9.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Halboub E, Al-Ak’hali MS, Al-Mekhlafi HM, Alhajj MN. Quality and readability of web-based Arabic health information on COVID-19: an infodemiological study. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):151.

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mozafarpour S, Norris B, Borin J, Eisner BH. Assessment of readability, quality and popularity of online information on ureteral stents. World J Urol. 2018;36(6):985–92.

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Acosta-Vargas P, Luján-Mora S, Acosta T, Salvador-Ullauri L. Toward a combined method for evaluation of web accessibility. In: Rocha Á, Guarda T, editors. Proceedings of the international conference on information technology & systems (ICITS 2018). Cham: Springer; 2018. p. 602–13. (Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing).

  • Rights and permissions

    Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

    Disclaimer:

    This article is autogenerated using RSS feeds and has not been created or edited by OA JF.

    Click here for Source link (https://www.biomedcentral.com/)