Navigating the Cancer Journey Using Web-Based Information: Grounded Theory Emerging From the Lived Experience of Cancer Patients and Informal Caregivers With Implications for Web-Based Content Design
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The internet is an important source of information for many informal caregivers and patients living with cancer. A better understanding of how individuals use the internet to meet their informational needs is important for guiding intervention development. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to develop a theory describing why individuals living with cancer use the internet to find information, characterize the challenges faced with existing web-based content, and provide recommendations for web-based content design. METHODS: Adults (≥18 years) with a history of being patients with cancer or informal caregivers were recruited from Alberta, Canada. After providing informed consent, participants were engaged through digitally recorded one-on-one semistructured interviews, focus groups, a web-based discussion board, and emails. Classic grounded theory guided the study procedures. RESULTS: A total of 21 participants took part in 23 one-on-one interviews and 5 focus groups. The mean age was 53 (SD 15.3) years. Breast, gynecological, and hematological cancers were the most common cancer types (4/21, 19% each). In total, 67% (14/21) of patients, 29% (6/21) of informal caregivers, and 5% (1/21) of individuals reporting both roles participated. Participants experienced many new challenges in their cancer journey and used the internet to become better oriented to them. For each challenge, internet searching attempted to address one or more of 3 key orientation questions: why the challenge was happening, what to expect, and options for managing it. Better orientation resulted in improved physical and psychosocial well-being. Content that was well laid out, concise, free of distractions, and that addressed the key orientation questions was identified as the most helpful in assisting with orientation. Creators of web-based content are encouraged to 1) clearly identify the cancer challenge and population the content is addressing, as well as the presence of any potentially distressing information; 2) provide versions of the content in different formats, including printer-friendly, audio, video, and alternative languages; 3) state who created the content, including the individuals, organizations, and processes involved; 4) place hyperlinks after the key orientation questions have been addressed; and 5) ensure that the content is optimized for discovery by search engines (ie, Google). CONCLUSIONS: Web-based content plays an essential role for many living with cancer. Clinicians are encouraged to take active steps to help patients and informal caregivers find web-based content that meets their informational needs. Content creators also have a responsibility to ensure that the content they create assists and does not hinder those navigating the cancer journey. Research is needed to better understand the many challenges that individuals living with cancer face, including how they are temporally related. In addition, how to optimize web-based content for specific cancer challenges and populations should be considered an important area for future research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».