RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Ineffective health communication can drive health disparities and limit the effectiveness of interventions to reduce them. Stock photo libraries are a critical tool for developers of patient education, health education, and intervention materials. It is not clear how well stock photo libraries represent communities bearing disproportionate burdens of disease. METHOD: We conducted a search using five popular stock image libraries (Adobe Stock Images, Canva, Getty Images, Microsoft Office Image Library, and Pixabay) in November 2021 to evaluate diversity and representation in health-related stock photos. We searched for the following five key preventive health topics: healthy eating, exercising, quitting smoking, vaccination, and pregnancy. The images (N = 495) were coded for age, gender presentation, representation of perceived minoritized racial/ethnic identity, skin color using the Massey-Martin skin color scale, markers of high socioeconomic status (SES), and access costs. Results. The representation of perceived minoritized people, darker skin color, and inclusion of markers of high SES varied greatly by the search term and library. Images predominately portrayed young adults and adults, with limited representation of other age groups. Images in libraries with any paywall were significantly more likely to depict a person of perceived minoritized racial/ethnic identity and depict darker skin colors, and were significantly less likely to contain markers of high SES identity than images in libraries that were free to use. DISCUSSION: We found that it costs more to develop culturally relevant health education materials for minoritized populations and groups that do not represent high SES populations. This may hinder the development of effective communication interventions.
RESUMO
The quality of patient education materials is an important issue for health educators, clinicians, and community health workers. We describe a challenge achieving reliable scores between coders when using the Patient Educational Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) to evaluate farmworker health materials in spring 2020. Four coders were unable to achieve reliability after three attempts at coding calibration. Further investigation identified improvements to the PEMAT codebook and evidence of the difficulty of achieving traditional interrater reliability in the form of Krippendorff's alpha. Our solution was to use multiple raters and average ratings to achieve an acceptable score with an intraclass correlation coefficient. Practitioners using the PEMAT to evaluate materials should consider averaging the scores of multiple raters as PEMAT results otherwise may be highly sensitive to who is doing the rating. Not doing so may inadvertently result in the use of suboptimal patient education materials.