Readability of Hospital Online Patient Education Materials Across Otolaryngology Specialties

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Akshay Warrier, Rohan P. Singh, Afash Haleem, Andrew Lee, David Mothy, Aakash Patel, Jean Anderson Eloy, Brian Manzi
{"title":"Readability of Hospital Online Patient Education Materials Across Otolaryngology Specialties","authors":"Akshay Warrier,&nbsp;Rohan P. Singh,&nbsp;Afash Haleem,&nbsp;Andrew Lee,&nbsp;David Mothy,&nbsp;Aakash Patel,&nbsp;Jean Anderson Eloy,&nbsp;Brian Manzi","doi":"10.1002/lio2.70101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>This study evaluates the readability of online patient education materials (OPEMs) across otolaryngology subspecialties, hospital characteristics, and national otolaryngology organizations, while assessing AI alternatives.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Hospitals from the US News Best ENT list were queried for OPEMs describing a chosen surgery per subspecialty; the American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery (AAO), American Laryngological Association (ALA), Ear, Nose, and Throat United Kingdom (ENTUK), and the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery (CSOHNS) were similarly queried. Google was queried for the top 10 links from hospitals per procedure. Ownership (private/public), presence of respective otolaryngology fellowships, region, and median household income (zip code) were collected. Readability was assessed using seven indices and averaged: Automated Readability Index (ARI), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog Readability (GFR), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Coleman–Liau Readability Index (CLRI), and Linsear Write Readability Formula (LWRF). AI-generated materials from ChatGPT were compared for readability, accuracy, content, and tone. Analyses were conducted between subspecialties, against national organizations, NIH standard, and across demographic variables.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Across 144 hospitals, OPEMs exceeded NIH readability standards, averaging at an 8th–12th grade level across subspecialties. In rhinology, facial plastics, and sleep medicine, hospital OPEMs had higher readability scores than ENTUK's materials (11.4 vs. 9.1, 10.4 vs. 7.2, 11.5 vs. 9.2, respectively; all <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05), but lower than AAO (<i>p</i> = 0.005). ChatGPT-generated materials averaged a 6.8-grade level, demonstrating improved readability, especially with specialized prompting, compared to all hospital and organization OPEMs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>OPEMs from all sources exceed the NIH readability standard. ENTUK serves as a benchmark for accessible language, while ChatGPT demonstrates the feasibility of producing more readable content. Otolaryngologists might consider using ChatGPT to generate patient-friendly materials, with caution, and advocate for national-level improvements in patient education readability.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48529,"journal":{"name":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lio2.70101","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lio2.70101","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

This study evaluates the readability of online patient education materials (OPEMs) across otolaryngology subspecialties, hospital characteristics, and national otolaryngology organizations, while assessing AI alternatives.

Methods

Hospitals from the US News Best ENT list were queried for OPEMs describing a chosen surgery per subspecialty; the American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery (AAO), American Laryngological Association (ALA), Ear, Nose, and Throat United Kingdom (ENTUK), and the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery (CSOHNS) were similarly queried. Google was queried for the top 10 links from hospitals per procedure. Ownership (private/public), presence of respective otolaryngology fellowships, region, and median household income (zip code) were collected. Readability was assessed using seven indices and averaged: Automated Readability Index (ARI), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog Readability (GFR), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Coleman–Liau Readability Index (CLRI), and Linsear Write Readability Formula (LWRF). AI-generated materials from ChatGPT were compared for readability, accuracy, content, and tone. Analyses were conducted between subspecialties, against national organizations, NIH standard, and across demographic variables.

Results

Across 144 hospitals, OPEMs exceeded NIH readability standards, averaging at an 8th–12th grade level across subspecialties. In rhinology, facial plastics, and sleep medicine, hospital OPEMs had higher readability scores than ENTUK's materials (11.4 vs. 9.1, 10.4 vs. 7.2, 11.5 vs. 9.2, respectively; all p < 0.05), but lower than AAO (p = 0.005). ChatGPT-generated materials averaged a 6.8-grade level, demonstrating improved readability, especially with specialized prompting, compared to all hospital and organization OPEMs.

Conclusion

OPEMs from all sources exceed the NIH readability standard. ENTUK serves as a benchmark for accessible language, while ChatGPT demonstrates the feasibility of producing more readable content. Otolaryngologists might consider using ChatGPT to generate patient-friendly materials, with caution, and advocate for national-level improvements in patient education readability.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
245
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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