Readability of Online Patient Education Materials Related to IR

McEnteggart, Gregory E.; Naeem, Muhammad; Skierkowski, Dorothy; Baird, Grayson L.; Ahn, Sun Ho; Soares, Gregory M.

doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2015.03.019

Cited by 22 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the constructs of readability, comprehension, and accuracy of information are closely related, and have recently been investigated for a myriad of physical health concerns (Beaunoyer, Arsenault, Lomanowska, & Guitton, 2017; Brigo, Otte, Igwe, Tezzon, & Nardone, 2015; Colaco, Svider, Agarwal, Eloy & Jackson, 2013; Kher, Johnson, & Griffith, 2017; Koo, Shee, & Yap, 2017; McEnteggart et al, 2015; Misra et al, 2013; Svider et al, 2013; Wong & Levi, 2017), little attention has been devoted to understanding the basic grade-level readability of online mental health information, for which readability is a systematic measure of ease with which a passage of text can be read (Albright et al, 1996; McInnes & Haglund, 2011), and grade-level readability is the grade level people need to have completed in order to read a selection of text.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A readability analysis of online mental health resources.

Skierkowski¹,

Florin²,

Harlow³

et al. 2019

American Psychologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analyzing the reading grade level of online mental health information is an important first step in ensuring that information is largely accessible by the general public, so as not to perpetuate existing health disparities across socioeconomic groups. The present study systematically examined grade-level readability of mental health information related to various psychiatric diagnoses, obtained from 6 highly utilized mental health websites, using a generalized estimating equations approach. Results suggest that, in general, the readability of mental health information is largely well above the 6th-to-8th grade level recommended by several national health organizations, including the CDC and NIH (Kutner, Greenberg, Jin, & Paulsen, 2006; National Institutes of Health, 2001, 2017), with reading-grade-level estimates from the model ranging from 5.62 to 17.9. Further efforts are required to ensure that writers of online health information do not exacerbate existing health disparities by ignoring these guidelines.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A readability analysis of online mental health resources.

Skierkowski¹,

Florin²,

Harlow³

et al. 2019

American Psychologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To limit subjectivity between the 2 reviewers, the grading system for each question was standardized in advance, based on the DISCERN manual. The total DISCERN score spans between 16 and 80 and breaks down as excellent (68-80), good (55-67), fair (42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54), poor (29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41), and very poor (16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28).…”

Section: Discern Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To date, there has been considerable heterogeneity among studies in terms of search engines or keywords used, number of screened websites, inclusion criteria, parameters evaluated, and assessment tools. Some studies focus only on one parameter (eg, readability) [21,[39][40][41], whereas others address quality and content as well [23,24,28,[42][43][44]. Multiple quality and readability assessment tools exist, the selection of which relies on the discretion of the study group.…”

Section: Principal Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies evaluating websites that provide patient information on IR procedures have been published previously. McEnteggart et al [ 21 ] assessed the readability of websites discussing 7 IR procedures (central venous catheter placement, vertebroplasty, varicocele embolization, deep vein thrombosis treatment, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, uterine artery embolization, and peripheral artery angioplasty) and found their readability to be below the recommended grade level. Murray et al [ 22 ], Alderson et al [ 23 ], and Lee et al [ 24 ] evaluated the quality and readability of websites referring to uterine artery, varicocele, and pelvic vein embolization, respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Value of Web-Based Patient Education Materials on Transarterial Chemoembolization: Systematic Review

Sidéris¹,

Vyllioti²,

Dima³

et al. 2021

JMIR Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Thousands of web searches are performed related to transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), given its palliative role in the treatment of liver cancer. Objective This study aims to assess the reliability, quality, completeness, readability, understandability, and actionability of websites that provide information on TACE for patients. Methods The five most popular keywords pertaining to TACE were searched on Google, Yahoo, and Bing. General website characteristics and the presence of Health On the Net Foundation code certification were documented. Website assessment was performed using the following scores: DISCERN, Journal of the American Medical Association, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease Score, and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool. A novel TACE content score was generated to evaluate website completeness. Results The search yielded 3750 websites. In total, 81 website entities belonging to 78 website domains met the inclusion criteria. A medical disclaimer was not provided on 28% (22/78) of website domains. Health On the Net code certification was present on 12% (9/78) of website domains. Authorship was absent on 88% (71/81) of websites, and sources were absent on 83% (67/81) of websites. The date of publication or of the last update was not listed on 58% (47/81) of websites. The median DISCERN score was 47.0 (IQR 40.5-54.0). The median TACE content score was 35 (IQR 27-43). The median readability grade level was in the 11th grade. Overall, 61% (49/81) and 16% (13/81) of websites were deemed understandable and actionable, respectively. Not-for-profit websites fared significantly better on the Journal of the American Medical Association, DISCERN, and TACE content scores. Conclusions The content referring to TACE that is currently available on the web is unreliable, incomplete, difficult to read, understandable but not actionable, and characterized by low overall quality. Websites need to revise their content to optimally educate consumers and support shared decision-making. Trial Registration PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020202747; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020202747

show abstract

“…Patients frequently receive written preparation instructions before radiological examinations. Studies have, however, consistently found that these materials are written at a level that is too advanced for most readers [16][17][18][19][20]. A study by Spiegel et al [21] showed that patients were almost four times more likely to have good quality colonoscopy examinations after receiving educational pamphlets designed to be easy to understand.…”

Section: Written Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Literacy and Patient Preparation in Radiology

Goguen¹

2016

Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health literacy is the capacity of an individual to obtain, process, and understand basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions. Unfortunately, more than half of Canadians cannot adequately navigate the health care system because they have limited health literacy. Patients with low health literacy may have limited reading abilities and poorer comprehension of written preparation documents. An important consideration in the radiation sciences for these patients is the ability to follow preparation requirements for diagnostic imaging procedures. It has been suggested that patients with limited health literacy are often less prepared for diagnostic examinations, and as a result, tend to have examinations of poorer diagnostic quality. Medical radiation technologists play an important role in educating patients regarding medical imaging examinations and helping them to properly prepare for these procedures. The purpose of this article is to define health literacy, provide some practical strategies to help medical radiation technologists identify patients with limited health literacy, and how to address limited health literacy issues to improve the quality of diagnostic imaging examinations. R ESUM E La litt eratie en mati ere de sant e la capacit e pour un individu d'obtenir, de traiter et de comprendre l'information de base sur la sant e et les services requis afin d'être en mesure de prendre des d ecisions eclair ees en mati ere de sant e. Malheureusement, plus de la moiti e des Canadiens ne sont pas en mesure de naviguer ad equatement dans le syst eme de sant e parce qu'ils ont une litt eratie limit ee en mati ere de sant e. Les patients avec une faible litt eratie peuvent avoir des difficult es de lecture, et une faible compr ehension des documents de pr eparations ecrits. Dans le domaine des sciences de la radiation, une consid eration importante pour ces patients est la capacit e de suivre les exigences de pr eparation en pr evision des proc edures d'imagerie diagnostique. Il a et e sugg er e que les patients ayant un faible niveau de litt eratie en mati ere de sant e sont souvent moins bien pr epar es pour les examens diagnostiques et qu'en cons equence ils tendent a avoir des examens de qualit e diagnostique plus faible. Les technologues en radiation m edicale (TRM) jouent un rôle important dans l' education des patients en ce qui a trait aux examens d'imagerie m edicale et en les aidant a se pr eparer ad equatement pour ces examens. Le but de cet article est de d efinir la litt eratie en mati ere de sant e, de fournir des strat egies pour aider les TRM a reconnaître les patients qui ont une litt eratie limit ee et a traiter les probl emes de litt eratie limit ee afin d'am eliorer la qualit e des examens d'imagerie diagnostiques.

show abstract

Readability of Online Patient Education Materials Related to IR

Cited by 22 publications

References 18 publications

A readability analysis of online mental health resources.

A readability analysis of online mental health resources.

The Value of Web-Based Patient Education Materials on Transarterial Chemoembolization: Systematic Review

Health Literacy and Patient Preparation in Radiology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About