Evaluation of Available Online Information Regarding Treatment for Vitreous Floaters

Kalavar, Meghana; Hubschman, Sasha; Hudson, Julia; Kuriyan, Ajay E.; Sridhar, Jayanth

doi:10.1080/08820538.2021.1887898

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, the 22 sites with online education materials related to vocal cord leukoplakia were written at readability levels above those recommended by the AMA/NIH. These results are consistent with many other readability studies that have been published within otolaryngology 7,8,20,28–33 and other specialties 34–43 …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…These results are consistent with many other readability studies that have been published within otolaryngology 7,8,20,[28][29][30][31][32][33] and other specialties. [34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43] Similarly, PEMAT-P understandability and actionability scores were low. The understandability score of 73.65% 6 7.05% in this study is comparable but a bit higher than that of similar studies on other topics, which reported scores ranging from 62.8% to 66.0%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Readability of Online Materials Related to Vocal Cord Leukoplakia

Shneyderman

Snow²,

Davis³

et al. 2021

OTO Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To assess readability and understandability of online materials for vocal cord leukoplakia. Study Design Review of online materials. Setting Academic medical center. Methods A Google search of “vocal cord leukoplakia” was performed, and the first 50 websites were considered for analysis. Readability was measured by the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG). Understandability and actionability were assessed by 2 independent reviewers with the PEMAT-P (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Printable Materials). Unpaired t tests compared scores between sites aimed at physicians and those at patients, and a Cohen’s kappa was calculated to measure interrater reliability. Results Twenty-two websites (17 patient oriented, 5 physician oriented) met inclusion criteria. For the entire cohort, FRES, FKGL, and SMOG scores (mean ± SD) were 36.90 ± 20.65, 12.96 ± 3.28, and 15.65 ± 3.57, respectively, indicating that materials were difficult to read at a >12th-grade level. PEMAT-P understandability and actionability scores were 73.65% ± 7.05% and 13.63% ± 22.47%. Statistically, patient-oriented sites were more easily read than physician-oriented sites ( P < .02 for each of the FRES, FKGL, and SMOG comparisons); there were no differences in understandability or actionability scores between these categories of sites. Conclusion Online materials for vocal cord leukoplakia are written at a level more advanced than what is recommended for patient education materials. Awareness of the current ways that these online materials are failing our patients may lead to improved education materials in the future.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Readability of Online Materials Related to Vocal Cord Leukoplakia

Shneyderman

Snow²,

Davis³

et al. 2021

OTO Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are similar studies in the literature on different ophthalmological subjects, biased online information could theoretically have a greater impact on treatment decisions. 22 Ivastinovic et al have previously found a similar study, but evaluated fewer sites in their study. In addition, they used the questions they prepared themselves as evaluation criteria.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Assessing the Quality, Reliability, and Readability of Online Information on Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Quality Information Retinal Detachment

ÖZTÜRK¹,

GÜNGÖR²

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Investigating the quality, accountability, readability, availability of translation among publicly available online resource materials on rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD). Methods Websites were classified as private or academic in Google search results where the searching region was set to United States. Quality and accountability were assessed using internationally accepted modified DISCERN criteria, JAMA and Health on the Net Code of Conduct (HONcode). Readability and availability of translation into other languages were evaluated. Results No statistical difference was found in modified DISCERN, JAMA, and HONcode scoring when websites were grouped as academic or private. (p = 0.27, p = 0.34, p = 0.53, respectively). There was a statistical difference between the two groups in the readability of academic and private websites. (p = 0.01) The readability of private websites was higher. When we group by the presence of HONcode certificate, 9 websites have certificates, 11 websites were not certified. Comparing the modified DISCERN and JAMA scores of these websites, the difference between the two groups were statistically significant. (p = 0.005, p = 0.004, respectively). Conclusions The Online content provided by websites should be written in a simple way that the reader can understand, with accurate information. The certified medical online content providers can be an indicator of the reliability of the content.

show abstract

“…Information overload can be caused by searches returning unrelated results (e.g., searching a particular symptom and getting results about different diagnoses or home remedies), complex text, or different trusted sites providing contradictory guidance [9,50,95,96]. Most people could not resolve these issues themselves, instead needing to discuss the information during consultations with their clinicians [95].…”

Section: Healthcare Consumers Reading Medical Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Paper Plain: Making Medical Research Papers Approachable to Healthcare Consumers with Natural Language Processing

August¹,

Wang²,

Bragg³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When seeking information not covered in patient-friendly documents, like medical pamphlets, healthcare consumers may turn to the research literature. Reading medical papers, however, can be a challenging experience. To improve access to medical papers, we introduce a novel interactive interface-Paper Plain 1 -with four features powered by natural language processing: definitions of unfamiliar terms, in-situ plain language section summaries, a collection of key questions that guide readers to answering passages, and plain language summaries of the answering passages. We evaluate Paper Plain, finding that participants who use Paper Plain have an easier time reading and understanding research papers without a loss in paper comprehension compared to those who use a typical PDF reader. Altogether, the study results suggest that guiding readers to relevant passages and providing plain language summaries, or "gists, " alongside the original paper content can make reading medical papers easier and give readers more confidence to approach these papers. CCS Concepts: • Human-centered computing → Empirical studies in interaction design; Interactive systems and tools; User studies.

show abstract

Evaluation of Available Online Information Regarding Treatment for Vitreous Floaters

Cited by 8 publications

References 30 publications

Readability of Online Materials Related to Vocal Cord Leukoplakia

Readability of Online Materials Related to Vocal Cord Leukoplakia

Assessing the Quality, Reliability, and Readability of Online Information on Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Quality Information Retinal Detachment

Paper Plain: Making Medical Research Papers Approachable to Healthcare Consumers with Natural Language Processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About