Assessing the readability of ClinicalTrials.gov

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 269-275

  Wu, Danny T Y ^a   Hanauer, David A ^a,b   Mei, Qiaozhu ^a   Clark, Patricia M ^a   An, Lawrence C ^a   Proulx, Joshua ^c   Zeng, Qing T ^c   Vinod Vydiswaran, V G ^a   Collins Thompson, Kevyn ^a   Zheng, Kai ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical trial; Clinicltrials.gov; Comprehension; Electronic health records; Natural language processing; Readability

Indexed keywords

DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; EDUCATION; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; LINGUISTICS; MEDLINE; QUANTITATIVE STUDY; RANDOM SAMPLE; ALGORITHM; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COMPREHENSION; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; FACTUAL DATABASE; NOMENCLATURE;

ALGORITHMS; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COMPREHENSION; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DATABASES, FACTUAL; MEDLINEPLUS; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC; VOCABULARY;

EID: 84963757412     PISSN: 10675027     EISSN: 1527974X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocv062     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA), Section 801. 2007; PUBLIC LAW 110-85-SEPT. 27. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/ manage-recs/fdaaa; accessed November 15, 2014.
2. Angelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(12):1250-1251.
3. Trends, Charts, and Maps. 2014. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/ resources/trends. Accessed November 15, 2014.
4. Background of ClincialTrials.gov. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/aboutsite/ background. Accessed November 15, 2014.
5. Historical perspective on the development of ClinicalTrials.gov, and an overview of FDA's role in supporting the success of the database, and accessibility to clinical trials information by the public. http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ ByAudience/ForPatientAdvocates/ParticipatinginClinicalTrials/ucm143647.htm. Accessed November 15, 2014.
6. Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trial. BMJ. 2001;323(7303):42-46.
7. Garner M, Ning Z, Francis J. A framework for the evaluation of patient information leaflets. Health Expect. 2012;15(3):283-294.
8. Rosemblat G, Logan R, Tse T, et al. Text features and readability: expert evaluation of consumer health text. Mednet 2006. http://www.mednetcon gress.org/fullpapers/MEDNET-192_RosemblatGracielaA_e.pdf. Accessed November 15, 2014.
9. Zeng-Treitler Q, Kim H, Goryachev S, et al. Text characteristics of clinical reports and their implications on the readability of personal health records. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2007;129(Pt 2):1117-1121.
10. Adnan M, Warren J, Orr M. Assessing text characteristics of electronic discharge summaries and their implications for patient readability. In: HIKM '10 Proceedings of the Fourth Australasian Workshop on Health Informatics and Knowledge Management. 2010;108:77-84.
11. Terblanche M, Burgess L. Examining the readability of patient-informed consent forms. J Clin Trials. 2010;2:157-162.
12. Dale E, Chall JS. A formula for predicting readability: instructions. Educ Res Bull. 1948;27(2):37-54.
13. Chall JS, Dale E. Manual for Use of the New Dale-Chall Readability Formula. Brookline, MA: Brookline Books; 1995.
14. Kincaid JP, Fishburne RP, Rogers RL, et al. Derivation of New Readability Formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count, and Flesch Reading Ease Formula) for Navy Enlisted Personnel. Research Branch Report 8-75. Chief of Naval Technical Training: Naval Air Station Memphis; 1975.
15. McLaughlin GH. SMOG grading: a new readability formula. J Reading. 1969;12:639-646.
16. Gunning R. The Technique of Clear Writing. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill International Book Co.; 1952.
17. Kim H, Goryachev S, Rosemblat G, et al. Beyond surface characteristics: a new health text-specific readability measurement. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2007;11:418-422.
18. About MedlinePlus. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/aboutmedlineplus. html. Accessed November 15, 2014.
19. Keselman A, Smith CA. A classification of errors in lay comprehension of medical documents. J Biomed Inform. 2012;45(6):1151-1163.
20. Smith CA, Hetzel S, Dalrymple P, et al. Beyond readability: investigating coherence of clinical text for consumers. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(4):e104.
21. Yin HS, Gupta RS, Tomopoulos S, et al. Readability, suitability, and characteristics of asthma action plans: examination of factors that may impair understanding. Pediatrics. 2013;131(1):e116-e126.
22. Davis TC, Mayeaux EJ, Fredrickson D, et al. Reading ability of parents compared with reading level of pediatric patient education materials. Pediatrics. 1994;93(3);460-468.
23. Agarwal N, Hansberry DR, Sabourin V, et al. A comparative analysis of the quality of patient education materials from medical specialties. JAMA Int Med. 2013;173(13);1257-1259.
24. D'Alessandro DM, Kingsley P, Johnson-West J. The readability of pediatric patient education materials on the world wide web. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001;155(7):807-812.
25. Risoldi Cochrane Z, Gregory P, Wilson A. Readability of consumer health information on the internet: a comparison of U.S. government-funded and commercially funded websites. J Health Commun. 2012;17(9);1003-1010.
26. Tian C, Champlin S, Mackert M, et al. Readability, suitability, and health content assessment of web-based patient education materials on colorectal cancer screening. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80(2);284-290.e2.
27. Langford AT, Resnicow K, Dimond EP, et al. Racial/ethnic differences in clinical trial enrollment, refusal rates, ineligibility, and reasons for decline among patients at sites in the National Cancer Institute's Community Cancer Centers Program. Cancer. 2014;120(6);877-884.
28. Baker MT, Taub HA. Readability of informed consent forms for research a veteran administration medical center. JAMA. 1983;250(19):2646-2648.
29. Tarnowski KJ, Allen DM, Mayhall C, et al. Readability of pediatric biomedical research informed consent forms. Pediatrics. 1990;85(1):58-62.
30. Meade CD, Howser DM. Consent forms: how to determine and improve their readability. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1992;19(10):1523-1528.
31. Hopper KD, TenHave TR, Hartzel J. How much do patients understand? Informed consent forms for clinical and research. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995;164(2):493-496.
32. Grossman SA, Piantadosi S, Covahey C. Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families? J Clin Oncol. 1996;12(10):2211-2215.
33. Grundner TM. On the readability of surgical consent forms. N Engl J Med. 1980;302(16):900-902.
34. Paasche-Orlow MK, Taylor HA, Brancati FL. Readability standards for informed- consent forms as compared with actual readability. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(8):721-726.
35. Wu TY, Hanauer DA, Mei Q, et al. Applying multiple methods to assess the readability of a large corpus of medical documents. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013;192:647-651.
36. Facts & Figures, University of Michigan Health System. http://www. uofmhealth.orgabout%20umhs/facts-figures. Accessed November 15, 2014.
37. Zheng K, Mei Q, Yang L, et al. Voice-dictated versus typed-in clinician notes: linguistic properties and the potential implications on natural language processing. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2011;2011:1630-1638. Epub 2011 October 22.
38. Aberdeen J, Bayer S, Yeniterzi R, et al. The MITRE Identification Scrubber Toolkit: design, training, and assessment. Int J Med Inform. 2010;79(12):849-859.
39. Hanauer D, Aberdeen J, Bayer S, et al. Bootstrapping a de-identification system for narrative patient records: cost-performance tradeoffs. Int J Med Inform. 2013;82(9):821-831.
40. Atkinson K. GNU Aspell. http://aspell.net/. Accessed November 15, 2014.
41. e-MedTools. OpenMedSpel - Opensource Medical Spelling. http://e-med tools.com/openmedspel.html. Accessed November 15, 2014
42. Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) 2013AB Release Information. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/archive/20140415/research/umls/knowledge_ sources/metathesaurus/release/index.html. Accessed November 15, 2014.
43. Ley P, Florio T. The use of readability formulas in health care. Psychol, Health Med. 1996;1(1);7-28.
44. Zeng-Treitler Q, Kim H, Goryachev S, et al. Text characteristics of clinical reports and their implications on the readability of personal health records. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2007;129(Pt 2):1117-1121.
45. Adnan M, Warren J, Orr M. Assessing text characteristics of electronic discharge summaries and their implications for patient readability. In: HIKM '10 Proceedings of the Fourth Australasian Workshop on Health Informatics and Knowledge Management. 2010;108:77-84.