Readability and Suitability of Online Patient Education Materials for Glaucoma

Martin, Cole A.; Khan, Saima; Lee, Rachel; Do, Anna; Sridhar, Jayanth; Crowell, Eric L.; Bowden, Eileen

doi:10.1016/j.ogla.2022.03.004

Cited by 19 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Using the SAM tool, we found that website information on infant health behaviors was generally adequate. This finding is consistent with that of other studies on the SAM [ 68 - 70 ]. Despite the overall adequate suitability ratings of information on the selected websites, there were marked limitations in terms of cultural appropriateness, literacy demand, and illustrations.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Interactivity, Quality, and Content of Websites Promoting Health Behaviors During Infancy: 6-Year Update of the Systematic Assessment

Jawad¹,

Cheng²,

Wen³

et al. 2022

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background As of 2021, 89% of the Australian population are active internet users. Although the internet is widely used, there are concerns about the quality, accuracy, and credibility of health-related websites. A 2015 systematic assessment of infant feeding websites and apps available in Australia found that 61% of websites were of poor quality and readability, with minimal coverage of infant feeding topics and lack of author credibility. Objective We aimed to systematically assess the quality, interactivity, readability, and comprehensibility of information targeting infant health behaviors on websites globally and provide an update of the 2015 systematic assessment. Methods Keywords related to infant milk feeding behaviors, solid feeding behaviors, active play, screen time, and sleep were used to identify websites targeting infant health behaviors on the Google search engine on Safari. The websites were assessed by a subset of the authors using predetermined criteria between July 2021 and February 2022 and assessed for information content based on the Australian Infant Feeding Guidelines and National Physical Activity Recommendations. The Suitability Assessment of Materials, Quality Component Scoring System, the Health-Related Website Evaluation Form, and the adherence to the Health on the Net code were used to evaluate the suitability and quality of information. Readability was assessed using 3 web-based readability tools. Results Of the 450 websites screened, 66 were included based on the selection criteria and evaluated. Overall, the quality of websites was mostly adequate. Media-related sources, nongovernmental organizations, hospitals, and privately owned websites had the highest median quality scores, whereas university websites received the lowest median score (35%). The information covered within the websites was predominantly poor: 91% (60/66) of the websites received an overall score of ≤74% (mean 53%, SD 18%). The suitability of health information was mostly rated adequate for literacy demand, layout, and learning and motivation of readers. The median readability score for the websites was grade 8.5, which is higher than the government recommendations (<grade 8). Overall, 74% (49/66) of the websites obtained a poor rating for interactivity, measuring active control, 2-way communication, and synchronicity. The most common features found on websites were social media links (61/66, 92%), frequently asked questions (48/66, 73%), and videos (44/66, 67%). Only 14% (9/66) of websites presented culturally responsive information. Conclusions Quality, content, readability, and interactivity of websites promoting health behaviors during infancy ranged between poor and adequate. Since the 2015 systematic assessment, there was a slight improvement in the quality of websites but no difference in the Suitability Assessment of Materials rating and readability of information. There is a need for researchers and health care providers to leverage innovative web-based platforms to provide culturally competent evidence-based information based on government guidelines that are accessible to those with limited English proficiency.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Interactivity, Quality, and Content of Websites Promoting Health Behaviors During Infancy: 6-Year Update of the Systematic Assessment

Jawad¹,

Cheng²,

Wen³

et al. 2022

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In most of these studies, the criterion was evaluated by two or more independent evaluators. The results of these studies showed that the overall suitability of materials is low to moderate suitability and they need to be improved in some constitutive features such as content, design, graphics and literacy (Akansel & Aydin, 2011; Ang et al, 2022; Avancini et al, 2021; Boureanu et al, 2021; Griffin et al, 2003; Guan et al, 2018; Martin et al, 2022; Rhee et al, 2013; Yin et al, 2013; D. F. Zhang et al, 2022; H. Zhang et al, 2022).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The findings revealed that 22 studies examined this criterion (Akansel & Aydin, 2011;Ang et al, 2022;Avancini et al, 2021;Boureanu et al, 2021;Bui et al, 2018;Fagerlin et al, 2004;Guan et al, 2018;Hoffmann & Ladner, 2012;Kloza et al, 2015;Lake et al, 2007;A. Luk & Aslani, 2011;Lyson et al, 2020;Manchaiah et al, 2020;Martin et al, 2022;Redfern et al, 2006;Rhee et al, 2013;Robins et al, 2016;Taki et al,…”

Section: Item Criteria Definition 4 Interactivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient education information material assessment criteria: A scoping review

Ahmadzadeh

Bahrami

Zare–Farashbandi

et al. 2023

Health Info Libraries J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Patient education information material (PEIM) is an essential component of patient education programs in increasing patients' ability to cope with their diseases. Therefore, it is essential to consider the criteria that will be used to prepare and evaluate these resources.Objective: This paper aims to identify these criteria and recognize the tools or methods used to evaluate them.Methods: National and international databases and indexing banks, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, the Cochrane Library, Magiran, SID and ISC, were searched for this review. Original or review articles, theses, short surveys, and conference papers published between January 1990 and June 2022 were included.Results: Overall, 4688 documents were retrieved, of which 298 documents met the inclusion criteria. The criteria were grouped into 24 overarching criteria. The most frequently used criteria were readability, quality, suitability, comprehensibility and understandability. Conclusion: This review has provided empirical evidence to identify criteria, tools, techniques or methods for developing or evaluating a PEIM. The authors suggest that developing a comprehensive tool based on these findings is critical for evaluating the overall efficiency of PEIM using effective criteria.

show abstract

“…Three prior studies published in the past year have analyzed the first 13, 15, and 30 Google search results that arise when typing the word "glaucoma" into the Google search engine. [17][18][19] Our analysis expands upon the conclusions of these studies by evaluating a total of 200 websites encompassing more detailed glaucoma diagnosis subtypes and available treatments, which may be accessed by patients. When presented with a glaucoma diagnosis, patients are often provided information about the type of glaucoma they have been diagnosed with as well as potential treatment options.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…[14][15][16] Recently, four studies have suggested that online patient education materials that populate after a Google search using the word "glaucoma" are also frequently written at an age-inappropriate level. [17][18][19][20] However, after being given a glaucoma diagnosis, patients may elect to search for online information related to their specific type of glaucoma (eg open-angle glaucoma, angle-closure glaucoma) and treatments (eg trabeculoplasty, trabeculectomy) recommended by their ophthalmologist. 10 To the best of our knowledge, there has not been a study to examine the readability and accountability of online patient education materials that populate when searching Google regarding various glaucoma types and glaucoma treatments using search parameters beyond the one-word search "glaucoma".…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the Readability and Accountability of Online Patient Education Materials Related to Glaucoma Diagnosis and Treatment

Cohen¹,

Fisher²,

Pershing³

2023

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To assess the readability and accountability of online patient education materials related to glaucoma diagnosis and treatment. Methods: We conducted a Google search for 10 search terms related to glaucoma diagnosis and 10 search terms related to glaucoma treatment. For each search term, the first 10 patient education websites populated after Google search were assessed for readability and accountability. Readability was assessed using five validated measures: Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and New Dale-Chall (NDC). Accountability was assessed using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks. The source of information for each article analyzed was recorded. Results: Of the 200 total websites analyzed, only 11% were written at or below the recommended 6th grade reading level. The average FRE and grade level for 100 glaucoma diagnosis-related articles were 42.02 ± 1.08 and 10.53 ± 1.30, respectively. The average FRE and grade level for 100 glaucoma treatment-related articles were 43.86 ± 1.01 and 11.29 ± 1.54, respectively. Crowdsourced articles were written at the highest average grade level (12.32 ± 0.78), followed by articles written by private practice/independent users (11.22 ± 1.74), national organizations (10.92 ± 1.24), and educational institutions (10.33 ± 1.35). Websites averaged 1.12 ± 1.15 of 4 JAMA accountability metrics. Conclusion: Despite wide variation in the readability and accountability of online patient education materials related to glaucoma diagnosis and treatment, patient education materials are consistently written at levels above the recommended reading level and often lack accountability. Articles from educational institutions and national organizations were often written at lower reading levels but are less frequently encountered after Google search. There is a need for accurate and understandable online information that glaucoma patients can use to inform decisions about their eye health.

show abstract

Readability and Suitability of Online Patient Education Materials for Glaucoma

Cited by 19 publications

References 26 publications

Interactivity, Quality, and Content of Websites Promoting Health Behaviors During Infancy: 6-Year Update of the Systematic Assessment

Interactivity, Quality, and Content of Websites Promoting Health Behaviors During Infancy: 6-Year Update of the Systematic Assessment

Patient education information material assessment criteria: A scoping review

Analysis of the Readability and Accountability of Online Patient Education Materials Related to Glaucoma Diagnosis and Treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About