Assessing knowledge translation following a pre-cancer diagnosis: a multinational evaluation of online resources targeting patients with cervical dysplasia.

Q2 Social Sciences
Garth Griffiths, Diane Tomalty, Michael A Adams, Olivia Giovannetti
{"title":"Assessing knowledge translation following a pre-cancer diagnosis: a multinational evaluation of online resources targeting patients with cervical dysplasia.","authors":"Garth Griffiths, Diane Tomalty, Michael A Adams, Olivia Giovannetti","doi":"10.1080/17538068.2025.2508346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Distressful clinician-to-patient dialogue such as a pre-cancer diagnosis of cervical dysplasia may interfere with information retention. Patient education material provided as an online resource offers a suitable option to review relevant health information outside the clinic. The aim of this study was to evaluate online resources (ORs) affiliated with healthcare institutions across Australia and the United Kingdom (UK) on their effectiveness to translate accessible and current knowledge to patients referred for loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive directory of ORs related to LEEP was compiled from public hospital websites across Australia and the UK. Quantitative and qualitative methods were applied to evaluate resource reading-level (measured using three validated readability indices); actionability and understandability (measured using the Patient Education Material Assessment Tool [PEMAT]); and content (described using content analysis to assess disclosure practices associated with LEEP-related complications).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All ORs (n = 39) exceeded the recommended reading level (Australia: x̄ = 10.07, σ = 1.01; UK: x̄ = 10.17, σ = 0.96). PEMAT results indicated higher percentages of ORs scored as understandable (Australia: 50.0%; UK: 69.7%) versus actionable (Australia: 33.3%; UK: 6.1%). Content analysis revealed widespread discordance in the disclosure of longer-term LEEP complications associated with pregnancy, fertility, and sexual function in both countries.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Disclosures with significant health and wellness implications should be made with clear reference to peer reviewed science. Wider application of purpose-designed health literacy tools could improve measures of readability, actionability and understandability. International collaborations may provide opportunities to develop more comprehensive and patient-centred education materials to improve provider-to-patient knowledge translation.</p>","PeriodicalId":38052,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication in Healthcare","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication in Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17538068.2025.2508346","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Distressful clinician-to-patient dialogue such as a pre-cancer diagnosis of cervical dysplasia may interfere with information retention. Patient education material provided as an online resource offers a suitable option to review relevant health information outside the clinic. The aim of this study was to evaluate online resources (ORs) affiliated with healthcare institutions across Australia and the United Kingdom (UK) on their effectiveness to translate accessible and current knowledge to patients referred for loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) treatment.

Methods: A comprehensive directory of ORs related to LEEP was compiled from public hospital websites across Australia and the UK. Quantitative and qualitative methods were applied to evaluate resource reading-level (measured using three validated readability indices); actionability and understandability (measured using the Patient Education Material Assessment Tool [PEMAT]); and content (described using content analysis to assess disclosure practices associated with LEEP-related complications).

Results: All ORs (n = 39) exceeded the recommended reading level (Australia: x̄ = 10.07, σ = 1.01; UK: x̄ = 10.17, σ = 0.96). PEMAT results indicated higher percentages of ORs scored as understandable (Australia: 50.0%; UK: 69.7%) versus actionable (Australia: 33.3%; UK: 6.1%). Content analysis revealed widespread discordance in the disclosure of longer-term LEEP complications associated with pregnancy, fertility, and sexual function in both countries.

Conclusions: Disclosures with significant health and wellness implications should be made with clear reference to peer reviewed science. Wider application of purpose-designed health literacy tools could improve measures of readability, actionability and understandability. International collaborations may provide opportunities to develop more comprehensive and patient-centred education materials to improve provider-to-patient knowledge translation.

评估癌前诊断后的知识转化:针对宫颈发育不良患者的在线资源的多国评估。
背景:痛苦的临床-患者对话,如宫颈癌前诊断宫颈发育不良可能干扰信息保留。作为在线资源提供的患者教育材料为在诊所外审查相关健康信息提供了合适的选择。本研究的目的是评估澳大利亚和英国医疗机构的在线资源(ORs)在将可获得的现有知识转化为接受环电切手术(LEEP)治疗的患者方面的有效性。方法:从澳大利亚和英国的公立医院网站上编制与LEEP相关的手术室综合目录。采用定量和定性相结合的方法评价资源阅读水平(采用3个经验证的可读性指标进行测量);可操作性和可理解性(使用患者教育材料评估工具[PEMAT]测量);和内容(使用内容分析来评估与leep相关并发症相关的披露实践)。结果:所有or (n = 39)均超过推荐阅读水平(澳大利亚:x ā = 10.07, σ = 1.01;UK: x ā = 10.17, σ = 0.96)。PEMAT结果显示,可理解的ORs比例较高(澳大利亚:50.0%;英国:69.7%)vs .可诉(澳大利亚:33.3%;英国:6.1%)。内容分析显示,两国在披露与妊娠、生育和性功能相关的较长期LEEP并发症方面存在广泛差异。结论:具有重大健康和健康影响的披露应明确参考同行评议的科学。更广泛地应用专门设计的卫生知识普及工具可以改善可读性、可操作性和可理解性的措施。国际合作可能为开发更全面和以患者为中心的教育材料提供机会,以改善提供者对患者的知识翻译。
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
Journal of Communication in Healthcare
Journal of Communication in Healthcare Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
×
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