Analysis of the readability of patient education materials from surgical subspecialties

Laryngoscope

Volumn 124, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 405-412

  Hansberry, David R ^a   Agarwal, Nitin ^a   Shah, Ravi ^a   Schmitt, Paul J ^c   Baredes, Soly ^b   Setzen, Michael ^d,e   Carmel, Peter W ^a   Prestigiacomo, Charles J ^a,b   Liu, James K ^a,b   Eloy, Jean Anderson ^a,b  

^a New Jersey Medical School   (United States)

^b RUTGERS NEW JERSEY MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

^d NORTH SHORE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

health literacy; internet; patient education; Readability; surgical subspecialty

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; HEALTH EDUCATION; HEALTH LITERACY; HUMAN; INTERNET; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PATIENT EDUCATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; READING; WEB BROWSER; OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY; SURGERY;

COMPREHENSION; HEALTH LITERACY; HUMANS; INTERNET; OTOLARYNGOLOGY; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; SPECIALTIES, SURGICAL;

EID: 84892905826     PISSN: 0023852X     EISSN: 15314995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/lary.24261     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Internet and American Life Project. Demographics of Internet Users. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center; 2011.
2. Fox S,. The Social Life of Health Information. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center; 2011.
3. Fox S,. Mobile Health 2010. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center; 2010.
4. Fox S, Rainie L,. Vital Decisions. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center; 2002.
5. Rice RE,. Influences, usage, and outcomes of Internet health information search: multivariate results from the Pew surveys. Int J Med Inform 2006; 75: 8-28.
6. Hargis G,. Readability and computer documentation. ACM Comput Doc 2000; 24: 122-131.
7. Klare GR,. The Measurement Of Readability. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press; 1963.
8. DuBay W,. The Principles of Readability. Costa Mesa, CA: Impact Information; 2004.
9. Wolf MS, Gazmararian JA, Baker DW,. Health literacy and functional health status among older adults. Arch Intern Med 2005; 165: 1946-1952.
10. DeWalt DA, Berkman ND, Sheridan S, Lohr KN, Pignone MP,. Literacy and health outcomes. J Gen Intern Med 2004; 19: 1228-1239.
11. Baker DW, Parker RM, Williams MV, Clark WS, Nurss J,. The relationship of patient reading ability to self-reported health and use of health services. Am J Public Health 1997; 87: 1027-1030.
12. Adkins AD, Singh NN, McKeegan GF, Lanier AE, Oswald DP,. Behavior treatment programs, readability, and treatment outcomes. Res Dev Disabil 2002; 23: 253-265.
13. National Center for Education Statistics. The Health Literacy of America's Adults: Results From the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences; 2006.
14. Weis BD,. Health Literacy: A Manual for Clinicians. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association, American Medical Foundation; 2003.
15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Simply put: a guide for creating easy-to-understand materials. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ healthcommunication/ToolsTemplates/Simply-Put-082010.pdf. Accessed June 29 2012.
16. National Institutes of Health. How to write easy-to-read health materials. Available at: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/etr.html. Accessed March 2, 2012.
17. Cherla DV, Sanghvi S, Choudhry OJ, Liu JK, Eloy JA,. Readability assessment of internet-based patient education materials related to endoscopic sinus surgery. Laryngoscope 2012; 122: 1649-1654.
18. Colaco M, Svider PF, Agarwal N, Eloy JA, Jackson IM,. Readability assessment of online urology patient education materials. J Urol 2013; 189: 1048-1052.
19. Eloy JA, Li S, Kasabwala K, et al. Readability assessment of patient education materials on major otolaryngology association websites. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012; 147: 848-854.
20. Kasabwala K, Agarwal N, Hansberry DR, Baredes S, Eloy JA,. Readability assessment of patient education materials from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012; 147: 466-471.
21. Kasabwala K, Misra P, Hansberry DR, et al. Readability assessment of the American Rhinologic Society patient education materials. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 2013; 3: 325-333.
22. Misra P, Agarwal N, Kasabwala K, Hansberry DR, Setzen M, Eloy JA,. Readability analysis of healthcare-oriented education resources from the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Laryngoscope 2013; 123: 90-96.
23. Patel CR, Cherla DV, Sanghvi S, Baredes S, Eloy JA,. Readability assessment of online thyroid surgery patient education materials [published online ahead of print September 13, 2012]. Head Neck. doi: 10.1002/hed.23157.
24. Sanghvi S, Cherla DV, Shukla PA, Eloy JA,. Readability assessment of internet-based patient education materials related to facial fractures. Laryngoscope 2012; 122: 1943-1948.
25. Svider PF, Agarwal N, Choudhry OJ, et al. Readability assessment of online patient education materials from academic otolaryngology-head and neck surgery departments. Am J Otolaryngol 2013; 34: 31-35.
26. Cherla DV, Sanghvi S, Choudhry OJ, Jyung RW, Eloy JA, Liu JK,. Readability assessment of internet-based patient education materials related to acoustic neuromas. Otol Neurotol. In press.
27. Flesch R,. How to Write Plain English: A Book for Lawyers and Consumers. New York, NY: Harper & Row; 1979.
28. Flesch R,. A new readability yardstick. J Appl Psychol 1948; 32: 221-233.
29. McLaughlin GH,. SMOG grading: a new readability formula. J Read 1969; 12: 8.
30. Coleman M, Liau TL,. A computer readability formula designed for machine scoring. J Appl Psychol 1975; 60: 2.
31. Gunning R,. The Technique of Clear Writing. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1952.
32. Chall JS,. Readability Revisited: The New Dale-Chall Readability Formula. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books; 1995.
33. Caylor JS, Sticht TG, Fox LC, Ford JP,. Methodologies for Determining Reading Requirements Of Military Occupational Specialties [Tech Report No. 73-5]. Alexandria, VA: Human Resources Research Organization; 1973.
34. Raygor AL,. The Raygor readability estimate: a quick and easy way to determine difficulty. In:, Pearson PD, ed. Reading: Theory, Research and Practice. Twenty-Sixth Yearbook of the National Reading Conference. Clemson, SC. 1977: 259-263.
35. Fry E,. A readability formula that saves time. J Read 1968; 11: 4.
36. Manning D,. Writing readable health messages. Public Health Rep 1981; 96: 4664-4465.
37. Kincaid JP,. Derivation of New Readability Formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog COunt, and Flesch Reading Ease Formula) for Navy Enlisted Personnel, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia, 1975.
38. Coleman M, Liau TL,. A Computer Readability Formula Designed for Machine Scoring. J Appl Psychol 1975; 60: 283-284.
39. Caylor JS,. Methodologies for Determining Reading Requirements of Military Occupational Specialists. Alexandria, VA: Human Resources Research Organization; 1973.
40. Diaz JA, Griffith RA, Ng JJ, Reinert SE, Friedmann PD, Moulton AW,. Patients' use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med 2002; 17: 180-185.
41. Gerber SB, Eiser RA,. The patient-physician relationship in the internet age: future prospects and the research agenda. J Med Internet Res 2001; 3: e15.
42. Ferguson T,. Online patient-helpers and physicians working together: a new partnership for high quality health care. BMJ 2000; 321: 1129-1132.
43. Murray E, Lo B, Pollack L, et al. The impact of health information on the internet on health care and the physician-patient relationship: national U.S. survey among 1,050 U.S. physicians. J Med Internet Res 2003; 5: e17.
44. Freimuth VS,. Assessing the readability of health education materials. Public Health Rep 1979; 94: 568-570.
45. 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 Prac 1990; 31: 533-538.
46. French KS, Larrabee JH,. Relationships among educational material readability, client literacy, perceived beneficence, and perceived quality. J Nurs Care Qual 1999; 13: 68-82.
47. Jubelirer SJ, Linton JC, Magnetti SM,. Reading versus comprehension: implications for patient education and consent in an outpatient oncology clinic. J Cancer Educ 1994; 9: 26-29.
48. Estey A, Musseau A, Keehn L,. Comprehension levels of patients reading health information. Patient Educ Couns 1991; 18: 165-169.
49. Misra P, Kasabwala K, Agarwal N, Eloy JA, Liu JK,. Readability analysis of internet-based patient information regarding skull base tumors. J Neurooncol 2012; 109: 573-580.
50. Greywoode J, Bluman E, Spiegel J, Boon M,. Readability analysis of patient information on the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery website. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009; 141: 555-558.
51. McAllister KA, Clement WA,. Readability and content of postoperative tonsillectomy instructions given to patients in Scotland, a completed audit cycle. Scott Med J 2012; 57: 4-7.
52. Bergman J, Gore JL, Singer JS, Anger JT, Litwin MS,. Readability of health related quality of life instruments in urology. J Urol 2010; 183: 1977-1981.
53. Sabharwal S, Badarudeen S, Unes Kunju S,. Readability of online patient education materials from the AAOS web site. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008; 466: 1245-1250.
54. Vives M, Young L, Sabharwal S,. Readability of spine-related patient education materials from subspecialty organization and spine practitioner websites. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34: 2826-2831.
55. Badarudeen S, Sabharwal S,. Assessing readability of patient education materials: current role in orthopaedics. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468: 2572-2580.
56. Schmitt PJ, Prestigiacomo CJ,. Readability of neurosurgery-related patient education materials provided by the American Association of Neurological Surgeons and the National Library of Medicine and National Institutes of Health [published online ahead of print November 7, 2011]. World Neurosurg. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2011.09.007.
57. Sun GH,. The digital divide in internet-based patient education materials. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012; 147: 855-857.