Online advertising and marketing claims by providers of proton beam therapy: Are they guideline based?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
6599 Background: Proton beam therapy (PBT) is a radiotherapy platform that purports an improved therapeutic ratio by way of a rapid radiation dose fall-off. Despite this technology being hindered by significant capital and patient costs, the number of centres offering PBT is increasing exponentially. Consensus guidelines support PBT use in a limited number of disease sites or on clinical trials. As patients frequently obtain information about PBT from hospital or cancer centre websites, the purpose of this study was to evaluate direct to consumer advertising (DTCA) content and claims made by proton therapy centre (PTC) websites. Methods: English PTC websites worldwide were identified using 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 indications for PBT. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify website characteristics that were associated with a higher likelihood to make non-evidence-based claims of PBT such as improved disease control or cure. Results: From the 48 PTCs with 46 English websites, most (58%) did not provide any references for claims made regarding PBT. These included: improved disease control or cure (61%), fewer side effects (85%), or was the standard of care (13%). Prostate (87%), head and neck (87%) and pediatric (83%) cancers were the most frequently listed PBT-indicated disease sites, consistent with international guidelines. However, pancreatobiliary (52%), breast (50%) and esophageal (44%) cancers were frequently advertised despite not being endorsed in any consensus guidelines. On multivariate analysis, an increasing number of listed disease sites and claims of being a regional PTC leader were associated with indicating that PBT offers greater disease control or cure. The availability of PBT through a clinical trial was mentioned on 57% of websites. Conclusions: PTC websites often contain information and DTCA claims inconsistent with 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 PBT providers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.097 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".