足踝手术患者在线教育材料的可读性。

Foot & ankle specialist Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-08 DOI:10.1177/19386400221116463
Davis A Hartnett, Alexander P Philips, Alan H Daniels, Brad D Blankenhorn
{"title":"足踝手术患者在线教育材料的可读性。","authors":"Davis A Hartnett, Alexander P Philips, Alan H Daniels, Brad D Blankenhorn","doi":"10.1177/19386400221116463","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background</i>. Online health education resources are frequently accessed by patients seeking information on orthopaedic conditions and procedures. The objectives of this study were to assess the readability of information provided by the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) and compare current levels of readability with previous online material. <i>Methods</i>. This study examined 115 articles classified as \"Conditions\" or \"Treatments\" on FootCareMD.org. Readability was assessed using the 6 readability assessment tools: Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog Score, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index, Coleman-Liau Index, and the Automated Readability Index. <i>Results</i>. The mean readability score across all metrics ranged from 9.1 to 12.1, corresponding to a 9th- to 12th-grade reading level, with a mean FKGL of 9.2 ± SD 1.1 (range: 6.3-15.0). No articles were written below the recommended US sixth-grade reading level, with only 3 articles at or below an eighth-grade level. Treatment articles had higher mean readability grade levels than condition articles (P = .03). <i>Conclusion</i>. Although the volume and quality of the AOFAS resource Web site has increased, readability of information has worsened since 2008 and remains higher than the recommended reading level for optimal comprehension by the general population.<b>Levels of Evidence:</b> Level IV:Retrospective quantitative analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":73046,"journal":{"name":"Foot & ankle specialist","volume":" ","pages":"9-18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Readability of Online Foot and Ankle Surgery Patient Education Materials.\",\"authors\":\"Davis A Hartnett, Alexander P Philips, Alan H Daniels, Brad D Blankenhorn\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19386400221116463\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>Background</i>. Online health education resources are frequently accessed by patients seeking information on orthopaedic conditions and procedures. The objectives of this study were to assess the readability of information provided by the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) and compare current levels of readability with previous online material. <i>Methods</i>. This study examined 115 articles classified as \\\"Conditions\\\" or \\\"Treatments\\\" on FootCareMD.org. Readability was assessed using the 6 readability assessment tools: Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog Score, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index, Coleman-Liau Index, and the Automated Readability Index. <i>Results</i>. The mean readability score across all metrics ranged from 9.1 to 12.1, corresponding to a 9th- to 12th-grade reading level, with a mean FKGL of 9.2 ± SD 1.1 (range: 6.3-15.0). No articles were written below the recommended US sixth-grade reading level, with only 3 articles at or below an eighth-grade level. Treatment articles had higher mean readability grade levels than condition articles (P = .03). <i>Conclusion</i>. Although the volume and quality of the AOFAS resource Web site has increased, readability of information has worsened since 2008 and remains higher than the recommended reading level for optimal comprehension by the general population.<b>Levels of Evidence:</b> Level IV:Retrospective quantitative analysis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73046,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Foot & ankle specialist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"9-18\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Foot & ankle specialist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19386400221116463\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/8/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foot & ankle specialist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19386400221116463","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景。寻求骨科疾病和手术信息的患者经常访问在线健康教育资源。本研究的目的是评估美国骨科足踝协会(AOFAS)提供的信息的可读性,并将目前的可读性水平与以前的在线资料进行比较。方法。本研究检查了 FootCareMD.org 上被归类为 "疾病 "或 "治疗 "的 115 篇文章。使用 6 种可读性评估工具对可读性进行了评估:Flesch 阅读轻松度、Flesch-Kincaid 分级 (FKGL)、Gunning Fog Score、Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index、Coleman-Liau Index 和自动可读性指数。结果。所有指标的平均可读性得分在 9.1 到 12.1 之间,相当于 9 到 12 年级的阅读水平,平均 FKGL 为 9.2 ± SD 1.1(范围:6.3-15.0)。没有一篇文章的阅读水平低于美国六年级的建议阅读水平,只有 3 篇文章的阅读水平达到或低于八年级。治疗文章的平均可读性等级高于条件文章(P = .03)。结论。虽然 AOFAS 资源网站的数量和质量都有所提高,但自 2008 年以来,信息的可读性有所下降,仍然高于为使普通人群达到最佳理解效果而推荐的阅读水平:第四级:回顾性定量分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Readability of Online Foot and Ankle Surgery Patient Education Materials.

Background. Online health education resources are frequently accessed by patients seeking information on orthopaedic conditions and procedures. The objectives of this study were to assess the readability of information provided by the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) and compare current levels of readability with previous online material. Methods. This study examined 115 articles classified as "Conditions" or "Treatments" on FootCareMD.org. Readability was assessed using the 6 readability assessment tools: Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog Score, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index, Coleman-Liau Index, and the Automated Readability Index. Results. The mean readability score across all metrics ranged from 9.1 to 12.1, corresponding to a 9th- to 12th-grade reading level, with a mean FKGL of 9.2 ± SD 1.1 (range: 6.3-15.0). No articles were written below the recommended US sixth-grade reading level, with only 3 articles at or below an eighth-grade level. Treatment articles had higher mean readability grade levels than condition articles (P = .03). Conclusion. Although the volume and quality of the AOFAS resource Web site has increased, readability of information has worsened since 2008 and remains higher than the recommended reading level for optimal comprehension by the general population.Levels of Evidence: Level IV:Retrospective quantitative analysis.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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