ABOP, the automatic patient information leaflet optimizer: Evaluation of a tool in development

Patient Education and Counseling

Volumn 83, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 411-416

  Franck, Maarten Charles J ^a   Foulon, Veerle ^b   Van Vaerenbergh, Leona ^a,b  

^a Hogeschool Antwerpen   (Belgium)

^b Research Centre for Pharmaceutical Care and Pharmaco Economics   (Belgium)

Author keywords

EC regulation; Patient information leaflet (PIL); Readability test; Redundancy; Revision tool; Scientific (medical) terminology; Warnings and instructions

Indexed keywords

OXAZEPAM; TETRACYCLINE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG INFORMATION; EUROPEAN UNION; EVALUATION RESEARCH; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; NOMENCLATURE; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT INFORMATION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS DEVELOPMENT; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; READING; SCORING SYSTEM; SEMI AUTOMATED LEAFLET OPTIMIZER;

ADULT; COMPREHENSION; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; HUMANS; MALE; NETHERLANDS; OXAZEPAM; PAMPHLETS; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; READING; TETRACYCLINE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79958769950     PISSN: 07383991     EISSN: 18735134     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.04.025     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Albert T., Chadwick S. How readable are practice leaflets?. Brit Med J 1992, 305:1266-1268.
2. Humphris G.M., Duncalf M., Holt D., Field E.A. The experimental evaluation of an oral cancer information leaflet. Oral Oncol 1999, 35:575-582.
3. Krass I., Svarstad B.L., Bultman D. Using alternative methodologies for evaluating patient medication leaflets. Patient Educ Couns 2002, 47:29-35.
4. Gal I., Prigat A. Why organizations continue to create patient information leaflets with readability and usability problems: an explanatory study. Health Educ Res 2004, 20:485-493.
5. Ross B.S., Potter L.S., Armstrong K.A. Improving patient educational literature: an understandable patient package insert for "the Pill" J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2004, 33:198-208.
6. Ninsk K., Schröder H. Zu Risiken und Nebenwirkungen: Lesen Sie die Packungsbeilage? 2005, WIdO, Bonn.
7. Wallace L.S., Keenum A.J., Roskos S.E., Blake G.H., Colwell S.T., Weiss B.D. Suitability and readability of consumer medical information accompanying prescription medication samples. Patient Educ Couns 2008, 70:420-425.
8. Pander Maat H., Lentz L. Improving the usability of patient information leaflets. Patient Educ Couns 2010, 80:113-119.
9. Beaver K., Luker K. Readability of patient information booklets for women with breast cancer. Patient Educ couns 1997, 31:95-102.
10. Wong I.C.K. Readability of patient information leaflets on antiepileptic drugs in the UL. Seizure 1999, 8:35-37.
11. Dickinson D., Raynor D.K., Duman M. Patient information leaflets for medicines: using consumer testing to determine the most effective design. Patient Educ Couns 2001, 43:147-159.
12. European Economic Community. Council directive 92/27/EEC of 31 March 1992 on the labeling of medicinal products for human use and on package leaflets. Brussels; 1992. [September 7th, 2010]. http://www.ikev.org/docs/eu/392L0027.pdf.
13. European Commission. Directive 2004/27/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 amending directive 2001/27/EC of the Community Code relating to medical products for human use. Brussels; 2004. [September 7th, 2010]. http://ec.europa.eu/health/files/eudralex/vol-1/dir_2004_27/dir_2004_27_en.pdf.
14. European Commission. A guideline on the readability of the labelling and package leaflet of medicinal products for human use. Brussels; 2006. [September 7th, 2010]. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/pharmaceuticals/files/pharmacos/docs/doc2006/09_2006/readability_consultation_2006_09_25_en.pdf.
15. European Commission. A guideline on the readability of the labelling and package leaflet of medicinal products for human use. Brussels; 2009. [September 7th, 2010]. http://ec.europa.eu/health/files/eudralex/vol-2/c/2009_01_12_readability_guideline_final_en.pdf.
16. European Commission. A guideline on the readability of the label and package leaflet of medicinal products for human use. Brussels; 1998. [September 7th, 2010]. http://www.alims.gov.rs/download_eng/regulativa/gl981002.pdf.
17. Pander Maat H. How readable are patient information leaflets? A test of three frequently used PIL's; 2008. [November 15th, 2010]. http://www.let.uu.nl/_Henk.PanderMaat/personal/begrijpelijkheid%20doc/rapport%252015-4.pdf.
18. Delaere I, Hoste V, Peersman C, Van Vaerenbergh L, Velaerts P. ABOP, automatic optimization of patient information leaflets. Proceedings of the international symposium on data and sense mining, machine translation and controlled languages; 2009. [November 15th, 2010]. http://webs.hogent.be/~ilae115/PaperIsmtcl.pdf.
19. European Medicines Agency. QRD annotated template. London; 2010. [November 15th, 2010]. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Templates_and_Form/2009/10/WC500004368.pdf.
20. Kesselman A., Tse T., Crowell J., Browne A., Ngo L., Zeng Q. Assessing consumer health vocabulary familiarity. J Med Internet Res 2007, 9(1). http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?&pubmedid=17478414, November 15th, 2010.
21. Sless D., Wiseman R. Writing about medicines for people: usability guidelines for consumer medicines information 1997, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. 2nd ed.