Assessment of Online Patient Education Materials From Major Ophthalmologic Associations

被引:103
作者
Huang, Grace [1 ]
Fang, Christina H. [1 ]
Agarwal, Nitin [2 ]
Bhagat, Neelakshi [1 ]
Eloy, Jean Anderson [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Langer, Paul D. [1 ]
机构
[1] Rutgers New Jersey Med Sch, Inst Ophthalmol & Visual Sci, Newark, NJ 07103 USA
[2] Univ Pittsburgh, Sch Med, Dept Neurol Surg, Pittsburgh, PA 15261 USA
[3] Rutgers New Jersey Med Sch, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Newark, NJ 07103 USA
[4] Rutgers New Jersey Med Sch, Ctr Skull Base & Pituitary Surg, Neurol Inst New Jersey, Newark, NJ 07103 USA
[5] Rutgers New Jersey Med Sch, Dept Neurol Surg, Newark, NJ 07103 USA
关键词
READABILITY ASSESSMENT; INFORMATION; INTERNET; COMPREHENSION; LITERACY; WEBSITES; SURGERY; FORMULA;
D O I
10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2014.6104
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
IMPORTANCE Patients are increasingly using the Internet to supplement finding medical information, which can be complex and requires a high level of reading comprehension. Online ophthalmologic materials from major ophthalmologic associations should be written at an appropriate reading level. OBJECTIVES To assess ophthalmologic online patient education materials (PEMs) on ophthalmologic association websites and to determine whether they are above the reading level recommended by the American Medical Association and National Institutes of Health. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Descriptive and correlational design. Patient education materials from major ophthalmology websites were downloaded from June 1, 2014, through June 30, 2014, and assessed for level of readability using 10 scales. The Flesch Reading Ease test, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook test, Coleman-Liau Index, Gunning Fog Index, New Fog Count, New Dale-Chall Readability Formula, FORCAST scale, Raygor Readability Estimate Graph, and Fry Readability Graph were used. Text from each article was pasted into Microsoft Word and analyzed using the software Readability Studio professional edition version 2012.1 for Windows. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Flesch Reading Ease score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook grade, Coleman-Liau Index score, Gunning Fog Index score, New Fog Count, New Dale-Chall Readability Formula score, FORCAST score, Raygor Readability Estimate Graph score, and Fry Readability Graph score. RESULTS Three hundred thirty-nine online PEMs were assessed. The mean Flesch Reading Ease score was 40.7 (range, 17.0-51.0), which correlates with a difficult level of reading. The mean readability grade levels ranged as follows: 10.4 to 12.6 for the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level; 12.9 to 17.7 for the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook test; 11.4 to 15.8 for the Coleman-Liau Index; 12.4 to 18.7 for the Gunning Fog Index; 8.2 to 16.0 for the New Fog Count; 11.2 to 16.0 for the New Dale-Chall Readability Formula; 10.9 to 12.5 for the FORCAST scale; 11.0 to 17.0 for the Raygor Readability Estimate Graph; and 12.0 to 17.0 for the Fry Readability Graph. Analysis of variance demonstrated a significant difference (P<.001) between the websites for each reading scale. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Online PEMs on major ophthalmologic association websites are written well above the recommended reading level. Consideration should be given to revision of these materials to allow greater comprehension among a wider audience.
引用
收藏
页码:449 / 454
页数:6
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]   A comparative analysis of neurosurgical online education materials to assess patient comprehension [J].
Agarwal, Nitin ;
Chaudhari, Amit ;
Hansberry, David R. ;
Tomei, Krystal L. ;
Prestigiacomo, Charles J. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2013, 20 (10) :1357-1361
[2]   A Comparative Analysis of the Quality of Patient Education Materials From Medical Specialties [J].
Agarwal, Nitin ;
Hansberry, David R. ;
Sabourin, Victor ;
Tomei, Krystal L. ;
Prestigiacomo, Charles J. .
JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2013, 173 (13) :1257-1259
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1973, METHODOLOGIES DETERM
[4]  
[Anonymous], HLTH LIT
[5]   Assessing Readability of Patient Education Materials: Current Role in Orthopaedics [J].
Badarudeen, Sameer ;
Sabharwal, Sanjeev .
CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2010, 468 (10) :2572-2580
[6]  
Chall J. S., 1995, Manual for use of the new Dale-Chall readability formula
[7]  
Cherla DV, 2013, OTOL NEUROTOL, V34, P1349, DOI 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31829530e5
[8]   Readability assessment of internet-based patient education materials related to endoscopic sinus surgery [J].
Cherla, Deepa V. ;
Sanghvi, Saurin ;
Choudhry, Osamah J. ;
Liu, James K. ;
Eloy, Jean Anderson .
LARYNGOSCOPE, 2012, 122 (08) :1649-1654
[9]   Readability Assessment of Online Urology Patient Education Materials [J].
Colaco, Marc ;
Svider, Peter F. ;
Agarwal, Nitin ;
Eloy, Jean Anderson ;
Jackson, Imani M. .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2013, 189 (03) :1048-1052
[10]   COMPUTER READABILITY FORMULA DESIGNED FOR MACHINE SCORING [J].
COLEMAN, M ;
LIAU, TL .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 1975, 60 (02) :283-284