Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCorkum, M.T.
dc.contributor.authorLiu, W.
dc.contributor.authorPalma, D.A.
dc.date.accessioned2019-05-21T18:56:26Z
dc.date.available2019-05-21T18:56:26Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85043775146&doi=10.1186%2fs13014-018-0988-z&partnerID=40&md5=b3f9d6612319a0d5a533207148b86f8b
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10713/9311
dc.description.abstractBackground: Cancer patients frequently search the Internet for treatment options, and hospital websites are seen as reliable sources of knowledge. Guidelines support the use of proton radiotherapy in specific disease sites or on clinical trials. This study aims to evaluate direct-to-consumer advertising content and claims made by proton therapy centre (PTC) websites worldwide. Methods: Operational PTC websites in English were identified through the Particle Therapy Co-Operative Group website. Data abstraction of website content was performed independently by two investigators. Eight international guidelines were consulted to determine guideline-based indications for proton radiotherapy. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine the characteristics of PTC websites that indicated proton radiotherapy offered greater disease control or cure rates. Results: Forty-eight PTCs with 46 English websites were identified. 60·9% of PTC websites claimed proton therapy provided improved disease control or cure. U.S. websites listed more indications than international websites (15·5 ± 5·4 vs. 10·4 ± 5·8, p = 0·004). The most common disease sites advertised were prostate (87·0%), head and neck (87·0%) and pediatrics (82·6%), all of which were indicated in least one international guideline. Several disease sites advertised were not present in any consensus guidelines, including pancreatobiliary (52·2%), breast (50·0%), and esophageal (43·5%) cancers. Multivariate analysis found increasing number of disease sites and claiming their centre was a local or regional leader in proton radiotherapy was associated with indicating proton radiotherapy offers greater disease control or cure. Conclusions: Information from PTC websites often differs from recommendations found in international consensus guidelines. As online marketing information may have significant influence on patient decision-making, alignment of such information with accepted guidelines and consensus opinion should be adopted by PTC providers. Copyright 2018 The Author(s).en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipAL has received speaker's honoraria from Varian Medical Systems Inc. His research is supported by the Schulich Clinician Scientist Award. DP is supported by the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research. GB has served as an advisor to the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, Ontario, Canada as part of a provincial proton beam task force.en_US
dc.description.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-018-0988-zen_US
dc.language.isoen-USen_US
dc.publisherBioMed Central Ltd.en_US
dc.relation.ispartofRadiation Oncology
dc.subject.meshMarketing of Health Services--ethicsen_US
dc.subject.meshProton Therapyen_US
dc.titleOnline advertising and marketing claims by providers of proton beam therapy: Are they guideline-based?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s13014-018-0988-z
dc.identifier.pmid29544511


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record