Online resources for strabismus: an evaluation of readability, complexity, and suitability.

IF 0.8 Q4 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Kristin Davis, Caitlin Blades, Scott Larson
{"title":"Online resources for strabismus: an evaluation of readability, complexity, and suitability.","authors":"Kristin Davis, Caitlin Blades, Scott Larson","doi":"10.1080/09273972.2024.2408029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Over one-third of US adults have never attended college, creating a large disparity in the readability of online health materials. Decreased health literacy and accessibility to medical information negatively affect patients and well-informed patients are more likely to experience better health outcomes (1). The NIH and AMA recommend patient-intended education materials be written at a sixth-grade reading level (2), therefore, this study analyzed the accessibility of the top ten web pages for \"strabismus.\"</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The first ten online resources returned in a Google search for \"strabismus\" were analyzed. Web pages were then assessed for the readability level (Simple Measure of Gobbledygook), complexity (PMOSE/IKIRSCH), and suitability (Suitability Assessment of Materials). Two independent raters assessed the complexity and suitability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Readability analysis of the strabismus resources revealed an average reading grade level of 11.4 ± 1.07. There was a statistical difference in the reading grade level between the .com and .gov, and the .org and .com websites (<i>p</i> = .029 and <i>p</i> = .031, respectively). Complexity analysis revealed a mean score of 6.50 ± 2.29, corresponding to an 8th-12th grade reading level. The suitability assessment showed a mean value of 70.3 <math><mo>±</mo></math> 10.1%, representing a \"superior\" score for the information provided to the reader. The inter-rater agreement was similar for the complexity and fair for the suitability analysis.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>On average, online resources for strabismus have a low complexity level. However, the majority of the top ten articles reviewed are above the recommended literacy level, indicating a need for revision.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>The vast amount of available online health resources have significantly affected the field of medicine. Most patients research their disease process using online sources and many reference this material before their initial ophthalmologic consultation. Considering that more than half of Americans read below the equivalent of a sixth-grade level and that the AMA/NIH recommend all patient-intended materials to be written above this level, there is a health literacy disconnect. This limits patients' ability to educate themselves about their medical conditions and participate in informed conversations regarding their healthcare. Patients who are unable to interpret health information accurately have increased rates of hospitalization, develop more medical conditions, and experience a higher rate of mortality. This preventable impediment to informed healthcare care magnifies the urgency for easily readable online resources that are formatted in a manner that is clear to understand and suitable for patients with lower health literacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":51700,"journal":{"name":"Strabismus","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Strabismus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09273972.2024.2408029","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Over one-third of US adults have never attended college, creating a large disparity in the readability of online health materials. Decreased health literacy and accessibility to medical information negatively affect patients and well-informed patients are more likely to experience better health outcomes (1). The NIH and AMA recommend patient-intended education materials be written at a sixth-grade reading level (2), therefore, this study analyzed the accessibility of the top ten web pages for "strabismus."

Methods: The first ten online resources returned in a Google search for "strabismus" were analyzed. Web pages were then assessed for the readability level (Simple Measure of Gobbledygook), complexity (PMOSE/IKIRSCH), and suitability (Suitability Assessment of Materials). Two independent raters assessed the complexity and suitability.

Results: Readability analysis of the strabismus resources revealed an average reading grade level of 11.4 ± 1.07. There was a statistical difference in the reading grade level between the .com and .gov, and the .org and .com websites (p = .029 and p = .031, respectively). Complexity analysis revealed a mean score of 6.50 ± 2.29, corresponding to an 8th-12th grade reading level. The suitability assessment showed a mean value of 70.3 ± 10.1%, representing a "superior" score for the information provided to the reader. The inter-rater agreement was similar for the complexity and fair for the suitability analysis.

Discussion: On average, online resources for strabismus have a low complexity level. However, the majority of the top ten articles reviewed are above the recommended literacy level, indicating a need for revision.

Clinical implications: The vast amount of available online health resources have significantly affected the field of medicine. Most patients research their disease process using online sources and many reference this material before their initial ophthalmologic consultation. Considering that more than half of Americans read below the equivalent of a sixth-grade level and that the AMA/NIH recommend all patient-intended materials to be written above this level, there is a health literacy disconnect. This limits patients' ability to educate themselves about their medical conditions and participate in informed conversations regarding their healthcare. Patients who are unable to interpret health information accurately have increased rates of hospitalization, develop more medical conditions, and experience a higher rate of mortality. This preventable impediment to informed healthcare care magnifies the urgency for easily readable online resources that are formatted in a manner that is clear to understand and suitable for patients with lower health literacy.

斜视在线资源:可读性、复杂性和适用性评估。
简介超过三分之一的美国成年人从未上过大学,这就造成了在线健康资料可读性方面的巨大差距。健康素养的降低和医疗信息的可获取性会对患者产生负面影响,而知情的患者更有可能获得更好的健康结果(1)。美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)和美国医学会(AMA)建议,患者所需的教育材料应按照六年级的阅读水平编写(2),因此,本研究分析了 "斜视 "十大网页的可读性:对谷歌搜索 "斜视 "时返回的前十个在线资源进行分析。然后对网页的可读性水平(Simple Measure of Gobbledygook)、复杂性(PMOSE/IKIRSCH)和适用性(Suitability Assessment of Materials)进行评估。由两名独立评分员对复杂性和适用性进行评估:斜视资源的可读性分析表明,平均阅读水平为 11.4 ± 1.07。.com和.gov以及.org和.com网站的阅读水平存在统计学差异(分别为p = .029和p = .031)。复杂性分析显示,平均得分为 6.50 ± 2.29,相当于 8-12 年级的阅读水平。适宜性评估显示平均值为 70.3 ± 10.1%,代表向读者提供的信息得分 "优"。在复杂性分析中,评分者之间的一致性相似,而在适宜性分析中,评分者之间的一致性尚可:讨论:平均而言,斜视在线资源的复杂程度较低。临床意义:临床意义:大量可用的在线医疗资源对医学领域产生了重大影响。大多数患者都会通过网络资源研究自己的疾病过程,许多人在初次眼科就诊前就会参考这些资料。考虑到半数以上美国人的阅读能力低于相当于六年级的水平,而美国医学会/美国国立卫生研究院建议所有患者使用的资料都应高于这一水平,因此存在着健康知识脱节的问题。这限制了患者了解自身病情和参与有关医疗保健的知情对话的能力。无法准确解读健康信息的患者住院率会增加,病情会加重,死亡率也会升高。这种可预防的阻碍知情医疗保健的因素凸显了易读性在线资源的紧迫性,这些资源的格式清晰易懂,适合健康素养较低的患者使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Strabismus
Strabismus OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
30
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信