Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Voice: An Updated Readability Analysis

Stefu, Julia; Slavych, Bonnie K.; Zraick, Richard I.

doi:10.1016/j.jvoice.2021.01.028

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Patient‐directed information included 101 audiology‐related 28 and 144 speech and language related leaflets or articles 28,45 in addition to 128 websites of varying origin/focus 32,36 . Patient‐reported outcome measurement tools were reviewed across four studies, with 34 assessments considered in total (Voice: n = 20; Stuttering: n = 10; Swallowing: n = 4) 48,52‐54 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Health literacy interventions in adult speech and language therapy: A scoping review

McKenna,

Gilheaney

2023

Health Expectations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundReduced health literacy can negatively impact care seeking, satisfaction with care and overall health outcomes. These issues are particularly common among people living with communication difficulties who are seeking care from speech and language therapists (SLTs). As such, the SLT must be aware of and sensitive to health literacy needs within their clinical practice, proactively adapting materials and resources to the health literacy needs of their patients. Despite this required core competency, little is known about the health literacy interventions used by SLTs when working with adult patients, and as such, there is limited and unclear guidance for the practicing clinician, leading to potentially suboptimal care delivery.ObjectivesTo explore the characteristics of health literacy interventions discussed in the literature for use by SLTs with adult patients.Search StrategyPubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science and The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched. Conference proceedings of the annual scientific meetings of the European Society for Swallowing Disorders and the Dysphagia Research Society were also searched. Grey literature was searched via the Open Grey database and, hand‐searches of reference lists from included studies were conducted by both authors.Inclusion CriteriaPublished and unpublished research investigating health literacy interventions provided by qualified SLTs providing care to adult patients in any setting for any speech and language related concerns. No language, geographic, study design or publication date limitations applied. Eligible participants in these studies were classified as: (1) patients and (2) professionals.Data Extraction and SynthesisData were charted in accordance with guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the PRISMA ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) independently by both authors.Main ResultsA total of 1112 potentially eligible studies were identified in the initial search, with 15 studies ultimately included in the synthesis. Study design and quality varied significantly. Most explored basic functional health literacy or narratively described core components of health literacy, which an SLT should understand, without employing an investigative research design.DiscussionLimited research has been conducted on the use of health literacy interventions within adult speech and language therapy practices. This finding is significant as SLTs regularly work with people living with communication problems, and therefore, addressing health literacy should be a core tenet of service delivery.ConclusionThere is a need for valid, reliable and rigorous investigations of health literacy interventions within speech and language therapy to ultimately improve future patient access to and benefit from the care provided.Patient or Public ContributionPatient public involvement in review studies is an emerging area. Due to resource issues, it was not possible to include this element in this study.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Stuttering: n = 10; Swallowing: n = 4). 48,[52][53][54] Readability refers to the ease with which a person can read and understand written information. 55 Various readability software tools can be used to analyse how closely scores correlate with reading comprehension scores.…”

Section: Selection Of Sources Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Health literacy interventions in adult speech and language therapy: A scoping review

McKenna,

Gilheaney

2023

Health Expectations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When considering the reading level criterion, the target population should be considered (e.g., underlying cognitive and/or linguistic deficits; Francis et al, 2016;Reeves et al, 2013). Notably, many PROMs used in clinical speech-language pathology are written beyond a fifth-grade reading level (e.g., Doak et al, 1996;Slavych et al, 2013;Zraick et al, 2012), despite readability evidence and recommendations (Stefu et al, 2021). However, PROMs included in these studies were developed for clinical populations without language impairment (e.g., persons with swallowing disorders; Zraick et al, 2012); therefore, the impact of PROM reading level on PWA is unspecified.…”

Section: Readabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Respondent Burden and Readability of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for People With Aphasia

Engelhoven

Bislick

Gray

et al. 2022

Topics in Language Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for persons with aphasia (PWA) are commonly used to measure various outcomes. Persons with aphasia commonly present with language deficits that can likely increase respondent burden. Elements that contribute to respondent burden include readability, design, and formatting methods. The aims of this study were to determine how PROMs for PWA rate in level of respondent burden and on readability levels. Method: Irwin's 2012 review of PROMs for PWA was used for inclusion criteria and additional PROMs developed after 2012 were identified. This method resulted in 14 PROMs, which were rated on proposed respondent burden criteria and also underwent a readability analysis. Results: Six PROMs achieved a 7 or higher with the proposed 10-point respondent burden measure, indicating lower respondent burden. Eight PROMs met the nationally recommended reading level of sixth grade. Conclusions: Results indicated that the several PROMs available for PWA fail to minimize respondent burden.

show abstract

“…La legibilidad es la que determina el nivel de comprensión lectora que una persona necesita para comprender un texto (Kružliaková et al, 2021;McInnes y Haglund, 2011). La investigación muestra que la legibilidad de la información de salud en línea está por encima de la capacidad de lectura promedio de un adulto, siendo entre 10 y 13, que corresponde a un nivel de lectura de secundaria o bachillerato (Devea et al, 2022;Edmunds et al, 2014 ;Hansberry et al, 2013;Yaqub y Ghezzi, 2015;Lim y Johnston, 2021;Oliffe et al, 2019;Patel et al, 2015;Ostrovsky, 2022;Reynolds et al, 2022;Stefu et al, 2021;Storr et al, 2016;Worral et al ., 2020;Zowalla et al, 2018). En la literatura médica, el nivel de lectura recomendado oscila entre los 5 a los 9 grados de nivel (Hamnes et al, 2016); equivalente en España a un nivel de 5º de primaria a 2º de ESO.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…Los estudios muestran el análisis actualmente utilizando estas herramientas para analizar la legibilidad de la información en salud, de patologías tratamientos, consentimientos informados, folletos de salud etc., siguen coincidiendo en que la información disponible está a un nivel de lectura superior al recomendado, considerándose como ilegibles (Abdi et al 2021;Behmer et al, 2020;Bompastore et al, 2018;Corcoran y Ahmad, 2016;Bompastores et al, 2018;Ostrovsky , 2022;Kecojevic et al, 2020;Moore y Milar, 2021;Peiris et al, 2021;Stefu et al, 2021;Stavropoulou-Tatla et al, 2022;Willian et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Análisis de la legibilidad de la información sanitaria dirigida a la población vulnerable

Piris¹

2022

RevPropul

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

El presente estudio evalúa la calidad de los materiales educativos en salud dirigidos a los usuarios/as migrantes, facilitados por organismos públicos, y disponibles en internet, con el fin de favorecer los autocuidados respecto a su salud, mediante un estudio observacional descriptivo, en el que se identifican páginas web de salud de organismos oficiales para población inmigrante, mediante el uso del motor de búsqueda Google. Tras analizarse las características interactivas de las webs seleccionadas, y del total de documentos disponibles, se evalúa la legibilidad del contenido con el analizador MU y la comprensión y usabilidad con la Herramienta de Evaluación de Materiales de Educación del Paciente (PEMAT), por observadores. Como resultados se obtiene que las páginas webs de organismos oficiales para inmigrantes, son precisas, con credibilidad, avaladas por fuentes y accesibles, pero dichas webs y el material del que disponían no estaban actualizados. La media de legibilidad de los documentos en castellano fue de 49,10 (DT=6,61); para los documentos en francés de 51,87 (DT=8,58) y los documentos en inglés 64,57 (DT=8,73). La puntuación promedio de comprensión PEMAT fue de 68,69 (DT=16,95) y de capacidad de acción 54,41 (DT= 24,26). Se concluye que los materiales educativos en salud no alcanzaron una calidad óptima. El nivel de lectura está por encima del promedio de un adulto, por lo que hay que hacer esfuerzos para mejorar la comprensión y usabilidad de los textos, así como contar con el público diana para la elaboración de materiales de educación sanitaria.

show abstract

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Voice: An Updated Readability Analysis

Cited by 9 publications

References 48 publications

Health literacy interventions in adult speech and language therapy: A scoping review

Health literacy interventions in adult speech and language therapy: A scoping review

Respondent Burden and Readability of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for People With Aphasia

Análisis de la legibilidad de la información sanitaria dirigida a la población vulnerable

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About