Search

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the readability of type 2 diabetes online patient education materials from academic institutions in the northeast USA and the American Diabetes Association. Many US residents utilise the Internet to obtain health information. Studies have shown that online patient education materials are often written above the recommended fifth grade reading level, and this may pertain to diabetes health information as well. As diabetes is the seventh leading cause of death in the USA and glycaemic control is related to health literacy, the readability of diabetic health information is pertinent. Methods: Many academic institutions provide type 2 diabetes online health information. A readability analysis was conducted of materials on the websites of academic institutions or affiliate hospitals with endocrinology fellowships in the northeast USA, and from the American Diabetes Association, using 10 quantitative scales: the Flesch Reading Ease Score, the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, the Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook, the New Dale-Chall Test, the Coleman-Liau Index, the New Fog Count, the Raygor Readability Estimate, the FORCAST test and the Fry Graph. Results: On average, northeast US academic institutions prepared their online diabetes patient education materials at above a 10th grade reading level. Conclusion: The readability of type 2 diabetes patient health information from academic websites is too difficult. It may benefit people with diabetes for future patient education materials to be prepared at lower reading grade levels.

Many Americans use smartphone-based mobile applications to acquire health information. Our study evaluated the readability of mobile application-based patient educational materials (PEMs) about five prevalent cancers in the United States. The Apple and Google mobile application marketplaces were queried for breast, colon, lung, prostate, and stomach cancer-related applications, which were subsequently screened for PEMs and assessed with 10 validated readability assessments. Twenty-one pertinent applications yielded 249 articles that were written at an 11.8 ± 2.3 grade level; only 12 (4.8%) articles were written below an eighth grade level. The majority of cancer-related PEMs were written at too difficult reading levels for American patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the readability of type 2 diabetes online patient education materials from academic institutions in the northeast USA and the American Diabetes Association. Many US residents utilise the Internet to obtain health information. Studies have shown that online patient education materials are often written above the recommended fifth grade reading level, and this may pertain to diabetes health information as well. As diabetes is the seventh leading cause of death in the USA and glycaemic control is related to health literacy, the readability of diabetic health information is pertinent. Methods: Many academic institutions provide type 2 diabetes online health information. A readability analysis was conducted of materials on the websites of academic institutions or affiliate hospitals with endocrinology fellowships in the northeast USA, and from the American Diabetes Association, using 10 quantitative scales: the Flesch Reading Ease Score, the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level, the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, the Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook, the New Dale–Chall Test, the Coleman–Liau Index, the New Fog Count, the Raygor Readability Estimate, the FORCAST test and the Fry Graph. Results: On average, northeast US academic institutions prepared their online diabetes patient education materials at above a 10th grade reading level. Conclusion: The readability of type 2 diabetes patient health information from academic websites is too difficult. It may benefit people with diabetes for future patient education materials to be prepared at lower reading grade levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Internet is a major source of health care information for patients. The American Medical Association and the National Institutes of Health recommend that consumer health care websites be written at a third- to seventh-grade level. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the level of readability of patient education websites pertaining to nuclear medicine. Methods: We searched for 10 terms on Google, collected the top 10 links for each term, and analyzed their level of readability using 10 well-established readability scales. Results: Collectively, the 99 articles were written at a grade level of 11.8 (SD, 3.4). Only 5 of the 99 articles were written at the third- to seventh-grade level recommended by the National Institutes of Health and the American Medical Association. Conclusion: There is a clear discordance between the readability level of nuclear medicine-related imaging terms and the National Institutes of Health and American Medical Association guidelines. This discordance may have a negative impact on patient understanding, contributing to poor health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives/Hypothesis Patients are increasingly using the Internet as a source of information on medical conditions. Because the average American adult reads at a 7th- to 8th-grade level, the National Institutes of Health recommend that patient education material be written between a 4th- and 6th-grade level. In this study, we assess and compare the readability of patient education materials on major surgical subspecialty Web sites relative to otolaryngology. Study Design Descriptive and correlational design. Methods Patient education materials from 14 major surgical subspecialty Web sites (American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, American Association of Endocrine Surgeons, American Society of General Surgeons, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, American Association of Neurological Surgeons, American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American Academy of Ophthalmology, American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, American Pediatric Surgical Association, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, Society for Thoracic Surgeons, and American Urological Association) were downloaded and assessed for their level of readability using 10 widely accepted readability scales. Results The readability level of patient education material from all surgical subspecialties was uniformly too high. Average readability levels across all subspecialties ranged from the 10th- to 15th-grade level. Conclusions Otolaryngology and other surgical subspecialties Web sites have patient education material written at an education level that the average American may not be able to understand. To reach a broader population of patients, it might be necessary to rewrite patient education material at a more appropriate level. Level of Evidence N/A. Laryngoscope, 124:405-412, 2014 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Americans have increasingly utilized the internet as a first-line resource for a variety of information, including healthcare-oriented materials. Therefore, these online resources should be written at a level the average American can understand. Patient education resources specifically written for and available to the public were downloaded from the American Association of Neurological Surgeons website and assessed for their level of readability using the Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook Grading, Coleman-Liau Index, and Gunning-Fog Index. A total of 71 subsections from different neurosurgical specialties were reviewed, including Cerebrovascular, Spine and Peripheral Nerves, Neurotrauma and Critical Care, Pain, Pediatric, Stereotactic and Functional, and Tumor material. All neurosurgical subspecialty education material provided on the American Association of Neurological Surgeons website was uniformly written at a level that was too high, as assessed by all modalities. In order to reach a larger patient population, patient education materials on the American Association of Neurological Surgeons website should be revised with the goal of simplifying readability. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the quality of online patient education materials for rehabilitation following neurological surgery. METHODS: Materials were obtained from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA), and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). After removing unnecessary formatting, the readability of each site was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level evaluations with Microsoft Office Word software. RESULTS: The average values of the Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level were 41.5 and 11.8, respectively, which are well outside the recommended reading levels for the average American. Moreover, no online section was written below a ninth grade reading level. CONCLUSION: Evaluations of several websites from the NINDS, NLM, AOTA, and AAOS demonstrated that their reading levels were higher than that of the average American. Improved readability might be beneficial for patient education. Ultimately, increased patient comprehension may correlate to positive clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given its practicality, the internet is a primary resource for patients afflicted with diseases like peripheral neuropathy. Therefore, it is important that the readily available online resources on peripheral neuropathy are tailored to the general public, particularly concerning readability. Patient education resources were downloaded from the US National Library of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Neuropathy.org, GBS/ CIDP Foundation International, Hereditary Neuropathy Foundation, Charcot-Marie-Tooth Association, Foundation for Peripheral Neuropathy, and Neuropathy Action Foundation websites. All patient education material related to peripheral neuropathy was evaluated for its level of readability using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. The FRE scores averaged 43.4 with only the US National Library of Medicine scoring above 60 (76.5). The Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level scores averaged 11.0. All scores were above a seventh-grade level except the US National Library of Medicine, which had a score of a fifth-grade reading level. Most Americans may not fully benefit from patient education resources concerning peripheral neuropathy education on many of the websites. Only the US National Library of Medicine, which is written at a fifth-grade level, is likely to benefit the average American. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives/Hypothesis: Deficient health literacy remains a widespread public issue. As such, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommends that all patient resources should be written around a sixth-grade level. The authors evaluate healthcare-oriented resources specified for patient use on the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (AAFPRS) Web site in order to identify potential areas of improvement and highlight those sections that may serve as paradigms for future revisions. Study Design: Descriptive and correlational design. Methods: Seventeen healthcare-oriented resources specifically for patients were downloaded in February 2012 from the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Web site. Readability assessments of each article were performed using Readability Studio Professional Edition Version 2012.1. These tests included the Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, SMOG Grading, Coleman-Liau Index, Gunning-Fog Index, the New Fog Count, the New Dale-Chall Readability Formula, FORCAST formula, Raygor Readability Estimate, and the Fry Graph. Results: Patient health education material found on the AAFPRS Web site has been found to be written at an average grade level of 12th grade using 10 different readability scales. Conclusions: Modifications of the patient education section of the AAFPRS Web site can increase the readability of the literature, and allow greater comprehension among a wider audience. Laryngoscope, 2013 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on assessment of readability of otolaryngology related Internet-based patient education material (IPEM) from otolaryngology associations in the U.S. It mentions the use of analysis of variance and post hoc Turkey's honestly significant difference (HSD) analysis to identify if IPEM adopt recommended reading level of American Medical Association (AMA) and National Institutes of Health (NIH). It concludes that IPEM were found out to exceed the recommended reading level.

Many Americans use smartphone-based mobile applications to acquire health information. Our study evaluated the readability of mobile application-based patient educational materials (PEMs) about five prevalent cancers in the United States. The Apple and Google mobile application marketplaces were queried for breast, colon, lung, prostate, and stomach cancer-related applications, which were subsequently screened for PEMs and assessed with 10 validated readability assessments. Twenty-one pertinent applications yielded 249 articles that were written at an 11.8 ± 2.3 grade level; only 12 (4.8%) articles were written below an eighth grade level. The majority of cancer-related PEMs were written at too difficult reading levels for American patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Patients frequently turn to the Internet when seeking answers to healthcare related inquiries including questions about the effects of radiation when undergoing radiologic studies. We investigate the readability of online patient education materials concerning radiation safety from multiple Internet resources. Methods Patient education material regarding radiation safety was downloaded from 8 different websites encompassing: (1) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, (2) the Environmental Protection Agency, (3) the European Society of Radiology, (4) the Food and Drug Administration, (5) the Mayo Clinic, (6) MedlinePlus, (7) the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and (8) the Society of Pediatric Radiology. From these 8 resources, a total of 45 articles were analyzed for their level of readability using 10 different readability scales. Results The 45 articles had a level of readability ranging from 9.4 to the 17.2 grade level. Only 3/45 (6.7%) were written below the 10th grade level. No statistical difference was seen between the readability level of the 8 different websites. Conclusions All 45 articles from all 8 websites failed to meet the recommendations set forth by the National Institutes of Health and American Medical Association that patient education resources be written between the 3rd and 7th grade level. Rewriting the patient education resources on radiation safety from each of these 8 websites would help many consumers of healthcare information adequately comprehend such material. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The extensive amount of medical literature available on the Internet is frequently accessed by patients. To effectively contribute to healthcare decision-making, these online resources should be worded at a level that is readable by any patient seeking information. The American Medical Association and National Institutes of Health recommend the readability of patient information material should be between a 4th to 6th grade level. In this study, we evaluate the readability of online patient education information available from the American Rhinologic Society (ARS) website using 9 different assessment tools that analyze the materials for reading ease and grade level of the target audience. Methods Online patient education material from the ARS was downloaded in February 2012 and assessed for level of readability using the Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Grading, Coleman-Liau Index, Gunning-Fog Index, FORCAST formula, Raygor Readability Estimate, the Fry Graph, and the New Dale-Chall Readability Formula. Each article was pasted as plain text into a Microsoft® Word® document and each subsection was analyzed using the software package Readability Studio Professional Edition Version 2012.1. Results All healthcare education materials assessed were written between a 9th grade and graduate reading level and were considered 'difficult' to read by the assessment scales. Conclusion Online patient education materials on the ARS website are written above the recommended 6th grade level and may require revision to make them easily understood by a broader audience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]