signpost iconProstate Cancer

Bottom Line:

The Cancer Library conducts comprehensive literature searches for systematic reviews relating to cancer and its management. After rigorous sifting and quality checks, the results are 'mapped' to a clinical activities matrix.

Publication details:

This mapping exercise provides a simple method of demonstrating where secondary research has been published. It also highlights the areas where little or no published secondary research has been found or is in the process of being quality checked by the Library.

We assessed this page using an appraisal instrument developed by Minervation specifically for this project. This approach is still in development, so you should regard the assessments as a general guide. Click here to find out more, or to let us know how you think the approach could be improved.

Reliability comments:

  • The content has been checked by a cancer specialist and information scientist.
  • The page is updated regularly.
  • The page cites all relevant sources.
  • The objectives are clearly stated on the homepage
  • A robust quality control procedure is reported.

Usability comments:

  • The information is delivered in a matrix which is suitable for this audience.
  • No login is needed to access the site.
  • The pages are busy and overloaded with information.

Scoring

Reliability
Item Score
Is it clear who has developed the web site and what their objectives are? 3
The objectives are clearly stated on the homepage
Does the site report a robust quality control procedure? 3
A robust quality control procedure is reported.
Is the page content checked by an expert? 3
The content has been checked by a cancer specialist and information scientist.
Is the page updated regularly? 3
The page is updated regularly.
Does the page cite relevant sources where appropriate? 3
The page cites all relevant sources.
Usability
Item Score
Is the site accessible without a login? 3
No login is needed to access the site.
Does the site conform to web Accessibility standards? 3
The site scores 80% for accessibility.
Is the site design clear and transparent? 2
The pages are busy and overloaded with information.
Is the site design consistent from one page to another? 2
Some pages are inconsistent.
Can users find what they need on the site? 1
The site is sometimes difficult to navigate.
Is the format of information clear and appropriate for the audience? 3
The information is delivered in a matrix which is suitable for this audience.
Weighted total (Usability + (Reliability x 2)): 44
We score each question out of three where:
0 = Never or Can't tell
1 = Sometimes or partly
2 = Mostly
3 = Always

Date rated

Jun 08

Source

NLH Cancer Specialist Library

Currency

Good

Audience

Health professionals

Publication Type

Summary

Format

Webpage

Reliability

5 stars

Usability

4.5 stars

Find: Similar

Contact us about this summary

Your comment or question:
G6H3KW