Beyond readability: Investigating coherence of clinical text for consumers

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Volumn 13, Issue 4, 2011, Pages

  Smith, Catherine Arnott ^a   Hetzel, Scott ^b   Dalrymple, Prudence ^c   Keselman, Alla ^d  

^a University of Wisconsin Madison   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c Drexel University   (United States)

^d NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Comprehension; Health literacy; Language tests; Patients; Retention (psychology); Vocabulary

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AMBULATORY CARE; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPREHENSION; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DIABETES MELLITUS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOMENCLATURE; QUESTIONNAIRE; SENSE OF COHERENCE;

ADULT; AGED; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COHORT STUDIES; COMPREHENSION; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DIABETES MELLITUS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OFFICE VISITS; QUESTIONNAIRES; SENSE OF COHERENCE; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84859905897     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14388871     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1842     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. McCray AT. Promoting health literacy. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2005;12(2):152-163 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1197/jamia.M1687] [Medline: 15561782]
2. Davis TC, Crouch MA, Wills G, Miller S, Abdehou DM. The gap between patient reading comprehension and the readability of patient education materials. J Fam Pract 1990 Nov;31(5):533-538. [Medline: 2230677]
3. Davis TC, Mayeaux EJ, Fredrickson D, Bocchini JA, Jackson RH, Murphy PW. Reading ability of parents compared with reading level of pediatric patient education materials. Pediatrics 1994 Mar;93(3):460-468. [Medline: 8115206]
4. Nielsen-Bohlman L, Panzer AM, Kindig DA, Committee on Health Literacy, Board on Neuroscience and Behavioral Health, Institute of Medicine. Health Literacy: A Prescription to End Confusion. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2004.
5. Zeng Q, Kim E, Crowell J, Tse T. A text corpora-based estimation of the familiarity of health terminology. In: Maojo V, Martin-Sanchez F, Pereira A, editors. Biological and Medical Data Analysis: 6th International Symposium, ISBMDA 2005, Aveiro, Portugal, November 10-11, 2005, Proceedings. Berlin: Springer; 2005:184-192.
6. Britten N, Bartholomew J, Morris R, Zander L. Consultants' and patients' views about patient access to their general practice records. J R Soc Med 1991 May;84(5):284-287. [Medline: 2041006]
7. Chamberlain G. Should patients read their own medical records? J R Soc Med 1987 Sep;80(9):541-542. [Medline: 3681865]
8. Fisher B, Britten N. Patient access to records: expectations of hospital doctors and experiences of cancer patients. Br J Gen Pract 1993 Feb;43(367):52-56. [Medline: 8466775]
9. Lovell A. In whose interest is access to medical records withheld? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1987 Jul;94(7):609-611. [Medline: 3620410]
10. Short D. Some consequences of granting patients access to consultants' records. Lancet 1986 Jun 7;1(8493):1316-1318. [Medline: 2872441]
11. Westin AF. Medical records: should patients have access? Hastings Cent Rep 1977 Dec;7(6):23-28. [Medline: 924782]
12. Tomkins CS, Braid JJ, Williams HC. Do dermatology outpatients value a copy of the letter sent to their general practitioner? In what way and at what cost? Clin Exp Dermatol 2004 Jan;29(1):81-86. [Medline: 14723730]
13. Nijland N, van Gemert-Pijnen J, Boer H, Steehouder MF, Seydel ER. Evaluation of internet-based technology for supporting self-care: problems encountered by patients and caregivers when using self-care applications. J Med Internet Res 2008;10(2):e13 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.957] [Medline: 18487137]
14. Keselman A, Smith CA, Divita G, Kim H, Browne AC, Leroy G, et al. Consumer health concepts that do not map to the UMLS: where do they fit? J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008 Aug;15(4):496-505 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1197/jamia.M2599] [Medline: 18436906]
15. Smith CA. Consumer language, patient language, and thesauri: a review of the literature. J Med Libr Assoc 2011 Apr;99(2):135-144. [doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.99.2.005] [Medline: 21464851]
16. Zeng QT, Tse T. Exploring and developing consumer health vocabularies. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006 Feb;13(1):24-29 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1197/jamia.M1761] [Medline: 16221948]
17. Patrick TB, Monga HK, Sievert ME, Houston Hall J, Longo DR. Evaluation of controlled vocabulary resources for development of a consumer entry vocabulary for diabetes. J Med Internet Res 2001;3(3):E24 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.3.3.e24] [Medline: 11720966]
18. Leroy G, Miller T. Perils of providing visual health information overviews for consumers with low health literacy or high stress. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2010;17(2):220-223 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1136/jamia.2009.002717] [Medline: 20190068]
19. Velardi P, Navigli R, d'Amadio P. Mining the Web to create specialized glossaries. IEEE Intell Syst 2008;23(5):18-25. [doi: 10.1109/MIS.2008.88]
20. Diefenbach MA, Butz BP. A multimedia interactive education system for prostate cancer patients: development and preliminary evaluation. J Med Internet Res 2004 Jan 21;6(1):e3 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.6.1.e3] [Medline: 15111269]
21. McNamara DS. Reading both high-coherence and low-coherence texts: effects of text sequence and prior knowledge. Can J Exp Psychol 2001 Mar;55(1):51-62. [Medline: 11301728]
22. Albrecht JE, O'Brien EJ. Updating a mental model: maintaining both local and global coherence. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1993;19(5):1061-1070. [doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.19.5.1061]
23. Kintsch W. Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1998.
24. McNamara DS, Kintsch E, Songer NB, Kintsch W. Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cogn Instr 1996;14(1):1-41. [doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci1401_1]
25. Britton BK, Gulgoz S. Using Kintsch's computational model to improve instructional text: effects of repairing inference calls on recall and cognitive structures. J Educ Psychol 1991;83(3):329-345. [doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.83.3.329]
26. McNamara DS, Louwerse MM, McCarthy PM, Graesser AC. Coh-Metrix: capturing linguistic features of cohesion. Discourse Process 2010;47(4):292-330. [doi: 10.1080/01638530902959943]
27. Vidal-Abarca E, Martínez G, Gilabert R. Two procedures to improve instructional text: effects on memory and learning. J Educ Psychol 2000;92(1):107-116. [doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.92.1.107]
28. Linderholm T, Everson MG, van den Broek P, Mischinski M, Crittenden A, Samuels J. Effects of causal text revisions on more- and less-skilled readers' comprehension of easy and difficult narrative texts. Cogn Instr 2000;18(4):525-556. [doi: 10.1207/S1532690XCI1804_4]
29. Kools M, Ruiter RA, van de Wiel MW, Kok G. Increasing readers' comprehension of health education brochures: a qualitative study into how professional writers make texts coherent. Health Educ Behav 2004 Dec;31(6):720-740. [doi: 10.1177/1090198104263340] [Medline: 15539544]
30. McCray AT, Ide NC. Design and implementation of a national clinical trials registry. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2000 Jun;7(3):313-323 [FREE Full text] [Medline: 10833169]
31. Leroy G, Helmreich S, Cowie JR, Miller T, Zheng W. Evaluating online health information: beyond readability formulas. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2008:394-398. [Medline: 18998902]
32. Kincaid JP, Fishburne RP, Rogers RL, Chissom BS. Naval Technical Training Command. 1975 Feb. Derivation of New Readability Formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count, and Flesch Reading Ease Formula) for Navy Enlisted PersonnelURL: http://digitalcollections.lib.ucf.edu/u/?/IST,26253 [accessed 2011-10-26] [WebCite Cache ID 62jmYwzsB]
33. Chapman WW, Fiszman M, Frederick PR, Chapman BE, Haug PJ. Quantifying the characteristics of unambiguous chest radiography reports in the context of pneumonia. Acad Radiol 2001 Jan;8(1):57-66. [doi: 10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80744-4] [Medline: 11201458]
34. Arocha JF, Wang D, Patel VL. Identifying reasoning strategies in medical decision making: a methodological guide. J Biomed Inform 2005 Apr;38(2):154-171. [doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2005.02.001] [Medline: 15797004]
35. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977 Mar;33(1):159-174. [Medline: 843571]
36. Slaughter L, Ruland C, Rotegård AK. Mapping cancer patients' symptoms to UMLS concepts. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2005:699-703. [Medline: 16779130]
37. Hong Y, Ehlers K, Gillis R, Patrick T, Zhang J. A usability study of patient-friendly terminology in an EMR system. Stud Health Technol Inform 2010;160(Pt 1):136-140. [Medline: 20841665]
38. Golodetz A, Ruess J, Milhous RL. The right to know: giving the patient his medical record. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1976 Feb;57(2):78-81. [Medline: 1083223]
39. Stein EJ, Furedy RL, Simonton MJ, Neuffer CH. Patient access to medical records on a psychiatric inpatient unit. Am J Psychiatry 1979 Mar;136(3):327-329. [Medline: 420331]
40. Fischbach RL, Sionelo-Bayog A, Needle A, Delbanco TL. The patient and practitioner as co-authors of the medical record. Patient Couns Health Educ 1980;2(1):1-5. [Medline: 10294999]
41. Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary. MedlinePlus. 2011. AcetaminophenURL: http://www.merriam-webster.com/medlineplus/acetaminophen [accessed 2011-10-28] [WebCite Cache ID 62m43o2au]
42. Epstein J. Altered Conditions: Diseases, Medicine, and Storytelling. New York, NY: Routledge; 1995.
43. Kennedy MA. A Curious Literature: Reading the Medical Case History From the Royal Society to Freud [dissertation]. Providence, RI: Brown University; 2000.
44. Egerod I, Bagger C. Patients' experiences of intensive care diaries-a focus group study. Intensive Crit Care Nurs 2010 Oct;26(5):278-287. [doi: 10.1016/j.iccn.2010.07.002] [Medline: 20692158]
45. Egerod I, Christensen D. A comparative study of ICU patient diaries vs. hospital charts. Qual Health Res 2010 Oct;20(10):1446-1456. [doi: 10.1177/1049732310373558] [Medline: 20562254]