Cancer Misinformation Pervasive Among Newly Diagnosed Patients, UF Study Reveals
A groundbreaking study conducted by the University of Florida Health Cancer Center has revealed a disturbing trend: a staggering 93% of newly diagnosed cancer patients have been exposed to at least one form of misinformation regarding cancer treatments. This misinformation, encompassing unproven or disproven therapies, myths, and misconceptions, often reaches patients unsolicited, significantly impacting their treatment decisions. The study, published in the Journal of Cancer Education, emphasizes the urgent need for healthcare providers to proactively address misinformation with their patients.
The study’s findings highlight the pervasive nature of cancer misinformation, underscoring the need for physicians to assume that their patients have likely encountered inaccurate information, regardless of whether they actively sought it out. Lead author Carma Bylund, Ph.D., a professor at the UF Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, stresses that this assumption is crucial for effective communication and shared decision-making in cancer care. Patients are bombarded with misinformation from various sources, making it essential for doctors to preemptively address these inaccuracies.
Surprisingly, the study reveals that the most common route of exposure to misinformation is not direct online searches, but rather through secondhand sources. Patients’ diagnoses often trigger a wave of well-meaning but misinformed advice from friends, family, and even social media algorithms. Naomi Parker, Ph.D., assistant scientist at UF and the study’s first author, explains that patients are often passively exposed to this content, even if they aren’t actively seeking it. This indirect exposure underscores the insidious nature of misinformation and the difficulty in controlling its dissemination.
This widespread misinformation has serious implications for cancer patients. It can deter them from pursuing evidence-based treatments, strain the patient-physician relationship, and even increase the risk of death. Cancer patients are particularly susceptible to misinformation due to the inherent anxiety and fear surrounding a diagnosis, coupled with the overwhelming amount of new information they must process. This vulnerability makes it even more critical for healthcare professionals to proactively address and debunk misinformation.
The UF research team employed a novel approach to quantify patients’ exposure to misinformation. They developed a survey based on five categories of unproven or disproven cancer treatments—vitamins and minerals, herbs and supplements, special diets, mind-body interventions, and miscellaneous treatments—along with common cancer myths and misconceptions. These misconceptions were adapted from National Cancer Institute materials and addressed questions like the impact of sugar consumption on cancer progression. The survey was administered to 110 recently diagnosed UF Health patients with prostate, breast, colorectal, or lung cancer, capturing their experiences during the crucial initial treatment decision-making period.
The survey results revealed that most patients had heard of potential cancer treatments outside the standard of care and were also familiar with at least one myth or misconception. The most frequent sources of this misinformation were close friends and family, followed by websites, distant acquaintances, social media, and news media. These findings emphasize the significant role of interpersonal communication in spreading misinformation, even in the age of readily accessible online information. The study marks a shift in misinformation research, highlighting the importance of addressing misinformation not just online, but also within personal networks.
The study’s findings indicate that patients rarely discuss these alternative treatments and misconceptions with their oncologists, further hindering effective communication and shared decision-making. Bylund, a member of the UF Health Cancer Center’s Cancer Control and Population Sciences research program, emphasizes that while the internet and media are primary sources of misinformation, it often reaches patients through interpersonal channels, primarily from family and friends. This underscores the need for educational interventions targeting not just patients, but also their support networks.
To combat this pervasive misinformation, Bylund and Parker are piloting an “information prescription” program. This initiative aims to guide patients towards reliable, evidence-based resources like the American Cancer Society, empowering them to make informed decisions about their care. The current study serves as a foundation for developing and evaluating such interventions, paving the way for broader strategies to counteract the spread and impact of cancer misinformation. Future research will involve surveying a larger patient population and assessing the effectiveness of these interventions in reducing misinformation exposure and promoting informed treatment choices. This work holds significant promise for improving patient outcomes and strengthening the patient-physician relationship in the face of the ongoing challenge of cancer misinformation.
