Readability of ENT consent form amendments [16]

Clinical Otolaryngology

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 346-347

  Murray, A ^a   Robertson, S ^b   Bingham, B ^c  

^a CROSSHOUSE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b GARTNAVEL GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c SOUTHERN GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ETHICS; INFORMED CONSENT; LABORATORY TEST; LETTER; OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TONSIL; TONSILLECTOMY;

COMPREHENSION; CONSENT FORMS; HUMANS; OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 33746475786     PISSN: 17494478     EISSN: 17494486     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2006.01262.x     Document Type: Letter

References (4)

1. Pothier D.D. (2005) Many patients may not understand consent forms. BMJ 330, 1151
2. Kubba H. (2000) Reading skills of otolaryngology outpatients: implications for information provision. J. Laryngol Otol. 114, 694-696
3. Scottish ENT consent forms. URL: http://www.show.scot.nhs.uk/sehd/ publications/CMO(2005)04adult.pdf and http://www.show.scot.nhs.uk/sehd/ publications/CMO(2005)04child.pdf
4. Common readability scoring systems. URL: http://www.readability. info/info.shtml