Assessing the Readability of Online English and Spanish Resources for Polydactyly and Syndactyly.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Ashley Shin, Praneet S Paidisetty, Surya Chivukula, Leonard Kuan-Pei Wang, Wendy Chen
{"title":"Assessing the Readability of Online English and Spanish Resources for Polydactyly and Syndactyly.","authors":"Ashley Shin, Praneet S Paidisetty, Surya Chivukula, Leonard Kuan-Pei Wang, Wendy Chen","doi":"10.1097/SAP.0000000000004121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Online patient education materials (PEMs) that are difficult to read disproportionately affect patients with low health literacy and educational attainment. Patients may not be fully informed or empowered to engage meaningfully with providers and advocate for their goals. We aim to assess the readability of online PEMs regarding polydactyly and syndactyly.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Google was used to query \"polydactyly\" and \"syndactyly\" in English and Spanish. The first 50 results were categorized into institutional (government, medical school, teaching hospital), noninstitutional (private practice, blog), and academic (journal articles, book chapters). Readability scores were generated using the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook and Spanish Simple Measure of Gobbledygook scales.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All polydactyly PEMs and >95% of syndactyly PEMs exceeded the National Institutes of Health recommended 6th-grade reading level. Altogether, English PEMs had an average reading level of a university freshman and Spanish PEMs had an average reading level of nearly a high school sophomore. For both diagnoses, English PEMs were harder to read than Spanish PEMs overall and when compared across the 3 categories between the 2 languages. Generally, noninstitutional PEMs were more difficult to read than their institutional counterparts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>To improve patient education, health literacy, and language equity, online resources for polydactyly and syndactyly should be written at the 6th-grade level. Currently, these PEMs are too advanced, which can make accessing, understanding, and pursuing healthcare decisions more challenging. Understanding health conditions and information is crucial to empower patients, regardless of literacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":8060,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Plastic Surgery","volume":"93 5","pages":"546-550"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000004121","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Online patient education materials (PEMs) that are difficult to read disproportionately affect patients with low health literacy and educational attainment. Patients may not be fully informed or empowered to engage meaningfully with providers and advocate for their goals. We aim to assess the readability of online PEMs regarding polydactyly and syndactyly.

Methods: Google was used to query "polydactyly" and "syndactyly" in English and Spanish. The first 50 results were categorized into institutional (government, medical school, teaching hospital), noninstitutional (private practice, blog), and academic (journal articles, book chapters). Readability scores were generated using the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook and Spanish Simple Measure of Gobbledygook scales.

Results: All polydactyly PEMs and >95% of syndactyly PEMs exceeded the National Institutes of Health recommended 6th-grade reading level. Altogether, English PEMs had an average reading level of a university freshman and Spanish PEMs had an average reading level of nearly a high school sophomore. For both diagnoses, English PEMs were harder to read than Spanish PEMs overall and when compared across the 3 categories between the 2 languages. Generally, noninstitutional PEMs were more difficult to read than their institutional counterparts.

Conclusions: To improve patient education, health literacy, and language equity, online resources for polydactyly and syndactyly should be written at the 6th-grade level. Currently, these PEMs are too advanced, which can make accessing, understanding, and pursuing healthcare decisions more challenging. Understanding health conditions and information is crucial to empower patients, regardless of literacy.

评估有关多指畸形和并指畸形的在线英语和西班牙语资源的可读性。
简介:难以阅读的在线患者教育资料(PEMs)对健康知识水平和教育程度较低的患者造成了极大的影响。患者可能无法充分了解相关信息,也没有能力与医疗服务提供者进行有意义的沟通,并为自己的目标进行宣传。我们旨在评估有关多指畸形和并指畸形的在线 PEM 的可读性:使用谷歌搜索英语和西班牙语的 "polydactyly "和 "syndactyly"。前 50 个结果分为机构(政府、医学院、教学医院)、非机构(私人诊所、博客)和学术(期刊论文、书籍章节)。可读性评分采用 "Gobbledygook 简易量表 "和 "Gobbledygook 西班牙语简易量表 "进行计算:结果:所有多指畸形儿童阅读材料和超过 95% 的并指畸形儿童阅读材料都超过了美国国立卫生研究院推荐的六年级阅读水平。总之,英语型多指畸形患儿的平均阅读水平相当于大学一年级学生,而西班牙语型多指畸形患儿的平均阅读水平接近高中二年级学生。就两种诊断而言,总体而言,英文患者的阅读能力要比西班牙文患者的阅读能力强,而且在两种语言的 3 个类别之间进行比较时也是如此。一般来说,非医疗机构的 PEM 比医疗机构的 PEM 更难阅读:结论:为了改善患者教育、健康知识普及和语言公平,多指畸形和并指畸形的在线资源应该以六年级的水平编写。目前,这些多指畸形和并指畸形教材的内容过于深奥,这使得获取、理解和做出医疗决策变得更具挑战性。无论识字与否,了解健康状况和信息对于增强患者的能力都至关重要。
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
13.30%
发文量
584
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The only independent journal devoted to general plastic and reconstructive surgery, Annals of Plastic Surgery serves as a forum for current scientific and clinical advances in the field and a sounding board for ideas and perspectives on its future. The journal publishes peer-reviewed original articles, brief communications, case reports, and notes in all areas of interest to the practicing plastic surgeon. There are also historical and current reviews, descriptions of surgical technique, and lively editorials and letters to the editor.
×
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