Abstract
The 68 National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated comprehensive and cancer centers have been tasked with leading the campaign in the fight against cancer, as well as providing education and outreach to the public. Therefore, it is important for these organizations to have an effective online presence to disseminate information and engage patients. The purpose of this study was to assess both the functionality and usability of cancer centers’ websites. The 68 center web domains were evaluated using two separate but complementary approaches. First, a webcrawler was used to score each website on five dimensions: accessibility, content, marketing, technology, and usability. Rankings on each dimension and an average ranking were calculated for all 68 centers. Second, a three-reader system was used to determine a list of all functionalities present on the websites. Both webcrawler scores and functionality prevalence were compared across center type. No differences were observed in webcrawler scores between comprehensive and cancer centers. Mean scores on all dimensions ranged between 5.47 and 7.09. For the functionality assessment, 64 unique functions were determined and categorized into 12 domains, with the average center possessing less than 50 % of the functions. This census assessment of NCI centers’ websites suggests the need for improvement to capitalize on new dissemination platforms available online. Progress in development of this technology can help achieve the goals of public education and outreach to a broad audience. This paper presents performance guidelines evaluated against best-demonstrated practice to facilitate social media use improvement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Medical expenditure panel survey. agency for healthcare research and quality 2015 [cited 2015 August 17]; Available from: http://meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/
DHHS/NIH/NCI/OCC, policies and guidelines relating to the Cancer Center Support Grant. 2008.
DHHS/NIH/NCI/OCC. Policies and guidelines relating to the P30 Cancer Center Support Grant. 2013; Available from: http://cancercenters.cancer.gov/documents/CCSG_Guidelines.pdf
NCI. NCI designated cancer centers. 2015 [cited 2015 8/25]; Available from: http://www.cancer.gov/research/nci-role/cancer-centers
Davis TC et al (2002) Health literacy and cancer communication. CA Cancer J Clin 52(3):134–149
Schoen C et al (2011) New 2011 survey of patients with complex care needs in eleven countries finds that care is often poorly coordinated. Health Aff (Millwood) 30(12):2437–2448
Northouse PG, Northouse LL (1988) Communication and cancer: issues confronting patients, health professionals, and family members. J Psychosoc Oncol 5:17–46
Koskan A et al (2014) Use and taxonomy of social media in cancer-related research: a systematic review. Am J Public Health 104(7):e20–e37
Attai DJ et al (2015) Twitter social media is an effective tool for breast cancer patient education and support: patient-reported outcomes by survey. J Med Internet Res 17(7), e188
Goh KY, Heng CS, Lin ZJ (2013) Social media brand community and consumer behavior: quantifying the relative impact of user- and marketer-generated content. Inf Syst Res 24(1):88–107
Wagner S (2010) More than just social. Hospital leaders discover hte revenue cycle gains from social media. Healthcare Informatics 27(6):65–66
Xiao N et al (2014) Factors influencing online health information search: an empirical analysis of a national cancer-related survey. Decis Support Syst 57:417–427
Korda H, Itani Z (2013) Harnessing social media for health promotion and behavior change. Health Promot Pract 14(1):15–23
Richter JP, Muhlestein DB, Wilks CE (2014) Social media: how hospitals use it, and opportunities for future use. J Healthc Manag 59(6):447–460
Lauckner, C. and P. Whitten, The differential effects of social media sites for promoting cancer risk reduction. J Cancer Educ, 2015
Huerta TR et al (2014) Hospital website rankings in the United States: expanding benchmarks and standards for effective consumer engagement. J Med Internet Res 16(2), e64
Ford EW et al (2012) Effective US health system websites: establishing benchmarks and standards for effective consumer engagement. J Healthc Manag 57(1):47–64
Batraga A, Rutitis D (2012) Corporate identity within the healthcare industry. Economics Management 17(4):1545
Ziebland S et al (2004) How the internet affects patients’ experience of cancer: a qualitative study. BMJ 328(7439):564
Eysenbach G (2003) The impact of the Internet on cancer outcomes. CA Cancer J Clin 53(6):356–371
LaCoursiere SP, Knobf MT, McCorkle R (2005) Cancer patients’ self-reported attitudes about the Internet. J Med Internet Res 7(3), e22
Reid P, Borycki EM (2011) Emergence of a new consumer health informatics framework: introducing the healthcare organization. Stud Health Technol Inform 164:353–357
Weaver JB et al (2010) Health information-seeking behaviors, health indicators, and health risks. Am J Public Health 100(8):1520
Simone CB 2nd et al (2012) The utilization of oncology web-based resources in Spanish-speaking Internet users. Am J Clin Oncol 35(6):520–526
Huang LC et al (2014) What factors influence minority use of National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers? Cancer 120(3):399–407
Conflicts of Interest
The authors are faculty employed by their respective universities, some of which maintain a web presence that was assessed in this study.
The article is not an RCT and therefore the authors did not complete the electronic CONSORT-EHEALTH questionnaire.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Huerta, T.R., Walker, D.M. & Ford, E.W. Cancer Center Website Rankings in the USA: Expanding Benchmarks and Standards for Effective Public Outreach and Education. J Canc Educ 32, 364–373 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-015-0931-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-015-0931-z