隐形眼镜佩戴者在线患者信息的可靠性和可读性。

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Genis Cardona, Carla Vega
{"title":"隐形眼镜佩戴者在线患者信息的可靠性和可读性。","authors":"Genis Cardona, Carla Vega","doi":"10.1016/j.clae.2025.102513","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to assess the reliability and readability of online patient information regarding contact lens (CL) wear and maintenance, given that many users may employ these resources to supplement or replace professional advice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten frequently asked questions (FAQs) concerning CL wear and maintenance were formulated based on clinical experience and literature search. Each FAQ was used to query Google, and the first 20 eligible websites were analysed, yielding a final sample of 200 websites. Reliability was assessed using the short version of the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) tool, while readability was evaluated through the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) tests. Websites were classified by country of origin and source type. Non-parametric group contrast and variable correlation analyses were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median EQIP score was 68.0 % (range 29.0 %-90.0 %), with 30.0 % of websites providing high-quality content (≥75 %). Websites from encyclopaedias and medical centres/hospitals scored higher in reliability compared to commercial and practitioner sources (p < 0.05). Readability was generally poor, with mean FRES and FKGL values of 55.8 ± 11.3 and 9.9 ± 2.3, respectively, exceeding recommended reading levels. Unexplained technical jargon was found in 59.5 % of websites. Encyclopaedias demonstrated better readability scores than news centres (p = 0.036). A weak but significant inverse correlation was found between EQIP and FRES scores (rho = -0.215; p = 0.002), indicating that higher reliability was associated with slightly better readability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, online patient information regarding CL wear and maintenance evidenced moderately high reliability but insufficient readability. Contact lens wearers may find this information difficult to understand, leading to poor compliance and potential ocular complications. Given the critical role of online resources in patient education, eye care professionals should guide patients towards reliable, comprehensible websites and consider modern communication strategies to enhance compliance and safety in CL wear.</p>","PeriodicalId":49087,"journal":{"name":"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye","volume":" ","pages":"102513"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reliability and readability of online patient information for contact lens wearers.\",\"authors\":\"Genis Cardona, Carla Vega\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clae.2025.102513\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to assess the reliability and readability of online patient information regarding contact lens (CL) wear and maintenance, given that many users may employ these resources to supplement or replace professional advice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten frequently asked questions (FAQs) concerning CL wear and maintenance were formulated based on clinical experience and literature search. Each FAQ was used to query Google, and the first 20 eligible websites were analysed, yielding a final sample of 200 websites. Reliability was assessed using the short version of the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) tool, while readability was evaluated through the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) tests. Websites were classified by country of origin and source type. Non-parametric group contrast and variable correlation analyses were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median EQIP score was 68.0 % (range 29.0 %-90.0 %), with 30.0 % of websites providing high-quality content (≥75 %). Websites from encyclopaedias and medical centres/hospitals scored higher in reliability compared to commercial and practitioner sources (p < 0.05). Readability was generally poor, with mean FRES and FKGL values of 55.8 ± 11.3 and 9.9 ± 2.3, respectively, exceeding recommended reading levels. Unexplained technical jargon was found in 59.5 % of websites. Encyclopaedias demonstrated better readability scores than news centres (p = 0.036). A weak but significant inverse correlation was found between EQIP and FRES scores (rho = -0.215; p = 0.002), indicating that higher reliability was associated with slightly better readability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, online patient information regarding CL wear and maintenance evidenced moderately high reliability but insufficient readability. Contact lens wearers may find this information difficult to understand, leading to poor compliance and potential ocular complications. Given the critical role of online resources in patient education, eye care professionals should guide patients towards reliable, comprehensible websites and consider modern communication strategies to enhance compliance and safety in CL wear.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49087,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"102513\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2025.102513\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contact Lens & Anterior Eye","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2025.102513","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:考虑到许多用户可能会使用这些资源来补充或替代专业建议,本研究旨在评估有关隐形眼镜(CL)佩戴和维护的在线患者信息的可靠性和可读性。方法:结合临床经验和文献资料,制定CL磨损与保养的10个常见问题。每个FAQ都用于查询谷歌,并对前20个符合条件的网站进行分析,从而产生200个网站的最终样本。使用简短版本的患者质量信息保证(EQIP)工具评估可靠性,而通过Flesch阅读简易评分(FRES)和Flesch- kincaid等级水平(FKGL)测试评估可读性。网站按原产国和来源类型分类。进行非参数组对比和变量相关分析。结果:EQIP评分中位数为68.0%(范围29.0% - 90.0%),其中30.0%的网站提供优质内容(≥75%)。来自百科全书和医疗中心/医院的网站在可靠性方面得分高于商业和从业者来源(p结论:总体而言,关于CL磨损和维护的在线患者信息具有中等高的可靠性,但可读性不足。隐形眼镜佩戴者可能会发现这些信息难以理解,从而导致依从性差和潜在的眼部并发症。鉴于在线资源在患者教育中的关键作用,眼科护理专业人员应引导患者访问可靠、易于理解的网站,并考虑现代沟通策略,以提高佩戴眼镜的依从性和安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reliability and readability of online patient information for contact lens wearers.

Purpose: This study aimed to assess the reliability and readability of online patient information regarding contact lens (CL) wear and maintenance, given that many users may employ these resources to supplement or replace professional advice.

Methods: Ten frequently asked questions (FAQs) concerning CL wear and maintenance were formulated based on clinical experience and literature search. Each FAQ was used to query Google, and the first 20 eligible websites were analysed, yielding a final sample of 200 websites. Reliability was assessed using the short version of the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) tool, while readability was evaluated through the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) tests. Websites were classified by country of origin and source type. Non-parametric group contrast and variable correlation analyses were conducted.

Results: The median EQIP score was 68.0 % (range 29.0 %-90.0 %), with 30.0 % of websites providing high-quality content (≥75 %). Websites from encyclopaedias and medical centres/hospitals scored higher in reliability compared to commercial and practitioner sources (p < 0.05). Readability was generally poor, with mean FRES and FKGL values of 55.8 ± 11.3 and 9.9 ± 2.3, respectively, exceeding recommended reading levels. Unexplained technical jargon was found in 59.5 % of websites. Encyclopaedias demonstrated better readability scores than news centres (p = 0.036). A weak but significant inverse correlation was found between EQIP and FRES scores (rho = -0.215; p = 0.002), indicating that higher reliability was associated with slightly better readability.

Conclusion: Overall, online patient information regarding CL wear and maintenance evidenced moderately high reliability but insufficient readability. Contact lens wearers may find this information difficult to understand, leading to poor compliance and potential ocular complications. Given the critical role of online resources in patient education, eye care professionals should guide patients towards reliable, comprehensible websites and consider modern communication strategies to enhance compliance and safety in CL wear.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
18.80%
发文量
198
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Contact Lens & Anterior Eye is a research-based journal covering all aspects of contact lens theory and practice, including original articles on invention and innovations, as well as the regular features of: Case Reports; Literary Reviews; Editorials; Instrumentation and Techniques and Dates of Professional Meetings.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信