Accuracy and self correction of information received from an internet breast cancer list: content analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of false or misleading statements in messages posted by internet cancer support groups and whether these statements were identified as false or misleading and corrected by other participants in subsequent postings. DESIGN: Analysis of content of postings. SETTING: Internet cancer support group Breast Cancer Mailing List. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of false or misleading statements posted from 1 January to 23 April 2005 and whether these were identified and corrected by participants in subsequent postings. RESULTS: 10 of 4600 postings (0.22%) were found to be false or misleading. Of these, seven were identified as false or misleading by other participants and corrected within an average of four hours and 33 minutes (maximum, nine hours and nine minutes). CONCLUSIONS: Most posted information on breast cancer was accurate. Most false or misleading statements were rapidly corrected by participants in subsequent postings.

Persuasive email messages for patient communication.

To improve health and reduce costs, we need to encourage patients to make better health care decisions. Since email is widely available, it may be useful for patient-directed interventions. However, we know little about how the contents of an email message can influence a health-related decision. We propose a model to understand how patients may process persuasive email messages.

Can prospective usability evaluation predict data errors?

Increasing amounts of clinical research data are collected by manual data entry into electronic source systems and directly from research subjects. For this manual entered source data, common methods of data cleaning such as post-entry identification and resolution of discrepancies and double data entry are not feasible. However data accuracy rates achieved without these mechanisms may be higher than desired for a particular research use. We evaluated a heuristic usability method for utility as a tool to independently and prospectively identify data collection form questions associated with data errors. The method evaluated had a promising sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 67%. The method was used as described in the literature for usability with no further adaptations or specialization for predicting data errors. We conclude that usability evaluation methodology should be further investigated for use in data quality assurance.