Methodological Issues in Documenting the Content of Websites for Potentially Malevolent Online Pharmacies
|
If you are the presenter of this abstract (or if you cite this abstract in a talk or on a poster), please show the QR code in your slide or poster (QR code contains this URL). |
Abstract
Background: A group of researchers are engaged in a systematic study of legitimate and illegitimate online pharmacies. Hundreds, if not thousands, of websites exist that can be described as online pharmacy storefronts. There are multiple ongoing efforts to document these websites. For example, National Association of Boards of Pharmacy (NABP) maintains databases of accredited online pharmacies and of not recommended sites. The latter database lists URLs of Internet drug outlets that “appear to be out of compliance with state and federal laws or NABP patient safety and pharmacy practice standards.†Many of the URLS in their database are still active and available to researchers. Still, the researchers are likely to face multiple challenges, such as those related to site designers’ illegal activities, for example, monetary theft, identity theft, sale of counterfeit drugs, sale of tainted drugs, and the co-option of consumer computers.
Objective: This presentation will outline methods of identifying and archiving potentially dangerous websites of online pharmacies. The focus is on ways of maintaining systematic research documentation while minimizing risks to researchers and their computer systems.
Methods: Systematic documentation begins with identifying sources of URLs, e.g., using a NAPB database compiled through joint efforts of consumers and the members of this professional organization. However, this database may not be an ideal sampling frame for researchers seeking a representative sample of URLs that reflect specific experiences of health consumers. An alternative is systematic discovery of pharmacy URLs through Internet searches. For these researchers we offer a replicable model of documenting pharmacy URLs from the first page of Google results. Google Insights for Search help estimate search term popularity and identify related search terms.
Results: After entering some websites, researchers are likely to encounter attacks on their computers aimed at co-option. They can document attack sources, temporal distribution of attempts to hack into the user’s computer and password combinations used during these attacks. Publicly available systems, such as WebCitation.org, an on-demand archiving system for web references, can be used to archive the contents of online pharmacy websites. Researchers who use these systems are likely to encounter some denial of access problems because those who maintain pharmacy websites appear to differentiate between a human user and a machine. Specialized software may be more effective in archiving website contents if it mimics the behaviour of human users.
Conclusions: Researchers of online pharmacies face multiple challenges as they attempt to identify and archive the contents of online pharmacy websites. This presentation will increase their awareness of possible risks and ways to minimize those risks without compromising the systematic process of gathering data on online pharmacies.
Objective: This presentation will outline methods of identifying and archiving potentially dangerous websites of online pharmacies. The focus is on ways of maintaining systematic research documentation while minimizing risks to researchers and their computer systems.
Methods: Systematic documentation begins with identifying sources of URLs, e.g., using a NAPB database compiled through joint efforts of consumers and the members of this professional organization. However, this database may not be an ideal sampling frame for researchers seeking a representative sample of URLs that reflect specific experiences of health consumers. An alternative is systematic discovery of pharmacy URLs through Internet searches. For these researchers we offer a replicable model of documenting pharmacy URLs from the first page of Google results. Google Insights for Search help estimate search term popularity and identify related search terms.
Results: After entering some websites, researchers are likely to encounter attacks on their computers aimed at co-option. They can document attack sources, temporal distribution of attempts to hack into the user’s computer and password combinations used during these attacks. Publicly available systems, such as WebCitation.org, an on-demand archiving system for web references, can be used to archive the contents of online pharmacy websites. Researchers who use these systems are likely to encounter some denial of access problems because those who maintain pharmacy websites appear to differentiate between a human user and a machine. Specialized software may be more effective in archiving website contents if it mimics the behaviour of human users.
Conclusions: Researchers of online pharmacies face multiple challenges as they attempt to identify and archive the contents of online pharmacy websites. This presentation will increase their awareness of possible risks and ways to minimize those risks without compromising the systematic process of gathering data on online pharmacies.
Medicine 2.0® is happy to support and promote other conferences and workshops in this area. Contact us to produce, disseminate and promote your conference or workshop under this label and in this event series. In addition, we are always looking for hosts of future World Congresses. Medicine 2.0® is a registered trademark of JMIR Publications Inc., the leading academic ehealth publisher.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.