Background: Expressed breast milk (EBM) is the best alternative to direct breastfeeding. However, expressing breast milk requires good milk handling and storage practices to preserve EBM safety and integrity. Mothers require handling and storage guidance, and many seek this from the internet and online support groups. Aim: This study aimed at exploring EBM handling and storage practices within an online exclusively expressing community and comparing these with both internet resources and evidence-based research. Methods: A naturalistic observational design was used. Content analysis was undertaken on 10,000 posts from an Australian Facebook peer-support community for women who exclusively express breast milk. Women\'s questions, reported practices, and advice for EBM handling and storage were analyzed thematically and compared with both guidelines and evidence-based research. Findings: There were 460 posts on EBM handling and storage. Three key themes emerged: \"How should I store my EBM?,\" \"How long can I store my EBM?,\" and \"How do I use my EBM?\" The greatest consistency and agreement between recommendations and community practices were found for storage methods, whereas the least was found for storage times. EBM handling and storage practices were influenced by factors such as EBM value, convenience, and cost, leading to occasional deviations from consistent practice recommendations. Conclusion: To facilitate safe EBM handling and continuation of expression, guidelines should be updated so they are consistent, align with current evidence, and cater to mothers\' cost, convenience, and milk wastage concerns. Health care providers can partner with women to evaluate online information to empower mothers in their decision making.

BACKGROUND: Older adults seek health-related information through casual internet searches. Yet, researchers focus on peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations as primary dissemination strategies. Representatives of mass media are alerted (passive diffusion) of new studies or recommendations, but the veracity of the information shared is not often analyzed, and when it is, the analysis is often not comprehensive. However, most older adults do not have access to peer-reviewed journal articles or paid subscription services for more reputable media outlets.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine what information was readily available (ie, open access) to older adults who may casually search the internet for physical activity recommendations.
METHODS: We performed a 6-part scoping review to determine the research question and available evidence, and extract data within open-access top hits using popular online search engines. Results were categorized by a dissemination model that has categories of sources, channels, audience, and messages.
RESULTS: After the iterative search process, 92 unique articles were included and coded. Only 5 (5%) cited physical activity guidelines, and most were coded as promoting healthy aging (82/92, 89%) and positive framing (84/92, 91%). Most articles were posed as educational, but the authors\' credentials were rarely reported (ie, 22% of the time). Muscle strengthening and balance components of the physical activity guidelines for older adults were rarely reported (72/92, 78% and 80/92, 87%, respectively) or inaccurately reported (3/92, 3% and 3/92, 3%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistent messages lead to mistrust of science and public health representatives. This work highlights the lack of evidence within existing open-access resources. Further efforts are needed to ensure evidence-based public health messages are in the sources and channels older adults are using to inform their knowledge and behaviors.

BACKGROUND: The internet is an emerging source of information for prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Since little is known about the quality of information on PCa provided online, we investigated its accordance to the latest European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines.
METHODS: A total of 89 German web pages were included for analysis. A quality model classifying the provider of information and its expertise was introduced. Correctness of provided information was systematically compared to the EAU guidelines.
RESULTS: Information was provided by medical experts (41%), media (11%), and pharmaceutical companies (6%). Certificates were found in 23% with a significantly higher rate if provided by medical experts (p = 0.003). The minority of web pages showed information in accordance with the EAU guidelines regarding screening (63%), diagnosis (32%), classification (39%), therapy (36%), complications (8%), and follow-up (27%). Web pages by medical experts as well as websites with any kind of certification showed a significantly higher guideline conformity regarding diagnosis (p = 0.027, p = 0.002), therapy (p = 0.010, p = 0.011), follow-up (p = 0.005, p < 0.001), and availability of references (p = 0.017, p = 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: The present study reveals that online health information on PCa lacks concordance to current guidelines. Certified websites or websites provided by medical experts showed a significantly higher quality and accordance with guidelines.

During traditional consensus conferences, organizers control the formal information available to participants-by compiling structured background materials and recruiting expert panelists. Less formally, however, participants are encouraged to bring their own experiences into the deliberations, and in doing so, they often seek outside information. We explore this heretofore understudied phenomenon of information seeking during a deliberative event: the U.S. National Citizens\' Technology Forum (2008), which addressed the convergence of nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, and cognitive science on the potential development of human-enhancement technologies. Through interviews with participants and observation of in-person and online deliberations, we identify outside information-seeking strategies and motivations. Our study demonstrates that conceptualizing models of deliberation as standalone settings of communication exchange ignores the reality of the complex information environment from which deliberative participants draw when making sense of technical issues. Future citizen deliberations must incorporate outside information seeking in the design of the exercises.