cancer info - Wikipedia vs. PDQ

September 16, 2011

Below are links to a news story about a journal paper in which the

cancer information in Wikipedia was compared with that of the

National Cancer Institute's Physician Data Query (PDQ;

The study concluded that: " Although the wiki resource had similar

accuracy and depth as the professionally edited database, it was

significantly less readable. Further research is required to assess

how this influences patients' understanding and retention. "

I have access only to the abstract, which indicated " A planned

subanalysis comparing common and uncommon cancers demonstrated no

difference. " , but I do not know the depth of the paper's analyses of

blood cancers.

Fyi, all of the papers published in the Journal of Oncology Practice

become freely available at PubMed about four months after publication.

Al Janski

PRESS RELEASE:

Summary: " Cancer information on Wikipedia is accurate, but not very

readable, study finds (September 15, 2011) -- It is a commonly held

that information on Wikipedia should not be trusted, since it is

written and edited by non-experts without professional oversight. But

researchers have found differently, according to a new study. "

SNIP...........

" ....we found that errors were extremely rare on Wikipedia. But the

way information was presented on PDQ is more patient-friendly. "

" ....the PDQ site was notably more readable: whereas PDQ was written

at a level suitable for a 9th grader, Wikipedia was written at a

level suitable for a college student. "

SNIP......

" The sites appear to be complementary -- but I recommend to my

patients that they start with PDQ where they are less likely to get

lost in jargon and hyperlinks. "

JOURNAL REFERENCE:

" Patient-Oriented Cancer Information on the Internet: A Comparison of

Wikipedia and a Professionally Maintained Database " ; Malolan S.

Rajagopalan et al.;

Journal of Oncology Practice; September 2011, vol. 7 no. 5, pages 319-323

Recommended Posts