1988
DOI: 10.1007/bf02904998
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electronic authoring and delivery of technical information

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The reading comprehension difficulty of the questionnaire was measured using the Flesch reading score and the Flesch-Kincaid grade level. 16 An a priori grade level of 12 or less was set due to the various technology names used in the survey instrument. The Flesch reading ease score was 42.9, which equates to a grade 11 Flesch-Kincaid reading level.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reading comprehension difficulty of the questionnaire was measured using the Flesch reading score and the Flesch-Kincaid grade level. 16 An a priori grade level of 12 or less was set due to the various technology names used in the survey instrument. The Flesch reading ease score was 42.9, which equates to a grade 11 Flesch-Kincaid reading level.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our manipulation of fluency targets message structure and is informed by the Flesch‐Kincaid Reading Ease Scale. This scale is commonly used to measure how easy it is to read written messages, ranging from technical manuals for military equipment to insurance contracts (Kinkaid, Braby, and Mears ; Walfish and Watkins ). Readability is reflected in terms of a score that ranges from 0 (very easy to read) to 100 (very difficult to read).…”
Section: Research Design and Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Florida requires that life insurance policies have a Flesch reading ease score of 45 or greater. (15) After designing the questionnaire of the current study, Flesch reading ease score was applied through an online calculator. Our text scale measured 73.4 indicating that the module is fairly easy to read.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prescribing or ordering wrong doses by physicians (65.7%) and noncompliance with administration sequences during chemotherapy administration (50.5%) were the most common errors. The most common estimated average monthly error was not following the administration sequence of the chemotherapeutic agents (4.1times/month, range [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. The most important underlying reasons for medication errors were heavy workload (49.7%) and insufficient number of staff (36.5%).…”
Section: (1)mentioning
confidence: 99%