Reading Level of Online Patient Education Materials From Major Obstetrics and Gynecology Societies

Fahimuddin, Fatimah Z.; Sidhu, Sanam; Agrawal, Anubhav

doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000003214

Cited by 15 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A Gunning Fog Score of 7–8 is ideal, and a score of 12 is considered too difficult for most people to read (Anon 2018f). Both measures have been used previously to assess the readability of medical literature 5 6 …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of costs and insurance policies for referral treatment of equine colic

Barker

Freeman

2019

Veterinary Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Colic is the most common emergency problem in horses. The aims of this study were to survey costs of different referral treatments and to review insurance policies relevant to horses with colic. Data were collected retrospectively from nine equine hospitals for case costs, categorised into four different outcomes: admitted and euthanased; euthanased during or immediately after surgery; medical treatment and survived more than 24 hours; and surgical treatment and survived more than 24 hours. Data from five UK equine insurance companies were extracted and analysed using a standardised case example. Costs were obtained for 108 cases. The mean cost for horses admitted and euthanased was £873.89 (range £459.72–£1471.51), and for surgical treatment and survival more than 24 hours was £6437.80 (range £3178.87–£9100.00). Insurance cover for veterinary fees ranged from £5000 to £7500, and monthly premium rates for a standardised case ranged from £27.06 to £47.06. The terms and conditions for the insurance policies ranged in length from 2098 to 17,701 words; Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease scores ranged from 21.6 to 57.7, indicating a high degree of complexity and low readability. This study highlights the complexity and challenges for decision-making in critical cases of colic.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of costs and insurance policies for referral treatment of equine colic

Barker

Freeman

2019

Veterinary Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To apply these scales, a free online readability checker (Readability Formulas) was utilized [55]. This web-based tool has been used in readability evaluations of a wide variety of health-related websites [36,46,50,[56][57][58][59].…”

Section: Readability Evaluation Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, it should not use medical jargon [35]. However, online health information is often written in at a level that is not easily understood by many people [36][37][38][39][40][41].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health websites on COVID-19: are they readable and credible enough to help public self-care?

Valizadeh-Haghi

Khazaal

Rahmatizadeh

2021

jmla

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: There are concerns about nonscientific and/or unclear information on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that is available on the Internet. Furthermore, people’s ability to understand health information varies and depends on their skills in reading and interpreting information. This study aims to evaluate the readability and creditability of websites with COVID-19-related information.Methods: The search terms “coronavirus,” “COVID,” and “COVID-19” were input into Google. The websites of the first thirty results for each search term were evaluated in terms of their credibility and readability using the Health On the Net Foundation code of conduct (HONcode) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Gunning Fog, and Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRE) scales, respectively.Results: The readability of COVID-19-related health information on websites was suitable for high school graduates or college students and, thus, was far above the recommended readability level. Most websites that were examined (87.2%) had not been officially certified by HONcode. There was no significant difference in the readability scores of websites with and without HONcode certification.Conclusion: These results suggest that organizations should improve the readability of their websites and provide information that more people can understand. This could lead to greater health literacy, less health anxiety, and the provision of better preventive information about the disease.

show abstract

“…This has been shown across medicine. [12][13][14][15][16][17] When patients do not understand resources provided to them, they may turn to the internet. 18 Resources that patients find on the internet are often outdated, inaccurate and incomplete; frequently, they consist of promotional material.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation of a mobile app for trauma education: results from a multicenter study

Childs

Breslin

Nguyen

et al. 2020

Trauma Surg Acute Care Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIn an era of shared decision making, patient expectations for education have increased. Ideal resources would offer accurate information, digital delivery and interaction. Mobile applications have potential to fulfill these requirements. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate adoption of a patient education application (app: http://bit.ly/traumaapp) at multiple sites with disparate locations and varied populations.MethodsA trauma patient education application was developed at one trauma center and subsequently released at three new trauma centers. The app contains information regarding treatment and recovery and was customized with provider information for each institution. Each center was provided with promotional materials, and each had strategies to inform providers and patients about the app. Data regarding utilization was collected. Patients were surveyed about usage and recommendations.ResultsOver the 16-month study period, the app was downloaded 844 times (70%) in the metropolitan regions of the study centers. The three new centers had 380, 89 and 31 downloads, while the original center had 93 downloads. 36% of sessions were greater than 2 min, while 41% were less than a few seconds. The percentage of those surveyed who used the app ranged from 14.3% to 44.0% for a weighted average of 36.8% of those having used the app. The mean patient willingness to recommend the app was 3.3 on a 5-point Likert scale. However, the distribution was bimodal: 60% of patients rated the app 4 or 5, while 32% rated it 1 or 2.DiscussionThe adoption of a trauma patient education app was successful at four centers with disparate patient populations. The majority of patients were likely to recommend the app. Variations in implementation strategies resulted in different rates of download. Integration of the app into patient education by providers is associated with more downloads.Level of evidenceLevel III care management.

show abstract

Reading Level of Online Patient Education Materials From Major Obstetrics and Gynecology Societies

Cited by 15 publications

References 29 publications

Assessment of costs and insurance policies for referral treatment of equine colic

Assessment of costs and insurance policies for referral treatment of equine colic

Health websites on COVID-19: are they readable and credible enough to help public self-care?

Implementation of a mobile app for trauma education: results from a multicenter study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About