Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Readability Analysis of the American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery Patient Educational Brochures.
Pakhchanian, Haig; Yuan, Mellissa; Raiker, Rahul; Waris, Shanawar; Geist, Craig.
Afiliación
  • Pakhchanian H; Department of Ophthalmology, George Washington University School of Medicine & Health Science, Washington DC, USA.
  • Yuan M; Department of Ophthalmology, Weill Cornell Medicine: Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
  • Raiker R; Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, WV, USA.
  • Waris S; Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, WV, USA.
  • Geist C; Department of Ophthalmology, George Washington University School of Medicine & Health Science, Washington DC, USA.
Semin Ophthalmol ; 37(1): 77-82, 2022 Jan 02.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33975496
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Previous studies have shown patient education material (PEM) in ophthalmology has been written at levels exceeding appropriate reading levels. However, information for readability in the field of oculoplastics remains limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the readability of patient educational brochures from the American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery (ASOPRS).

METHODS:

Patient educational brochures from ASOPRS were analyzed for readability. The body of text from all 18 ASOPRS patient brochures was analyzed by ten validated tests for English readability assessment Flesch Reading Ease Test (FRE), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), Gunning Fog Index (GFI), New Dale-Chall Readability (NDC), FORCAST, Fry Graph Readability (FG), Raygor Readability Estimate (RRE), and New Fog Count (NFC).

RESULTS:

The mean (± SD) readability scores from the 18 ASOPRS patient brochures were 48 (4.3), 11.0 (0.8), 13.0 (0.7), 11.7 (0.8), 13.6 (0.9), 11.3 (0.8), 11.1 (0.5), 12.1 (1.5), 12.2 (1.0), and 10.6 (1.3) for FRE, FKGL, SMOG, CLI, GFI, NDC, FORCAST, FG, RRE, and NFC, respectively. All ten of the mean readability scores were above the recommended reading levels.

CONCLUSIONS:

These findings show that the average patient may have difficulty understanding educational information provided by ASOPRS patient brochures, thereby hindering their ability to make informed decisions on their healthcare. Revision with readability as a primary goal, with input from patients and caregivers, may be necessary to improve health literacy among patients who seek oculoplastic care.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Oftalmología / Procedimientos de Cirugía Plástica Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Humans País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: Semin Ophthalmol Asunto de la revista: OFTALMOLOGIA Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: ENGLAND / ESCOCIA / GB / GREAT BRITAIN / INGLATERRA / REINO UNIDO / SCOTLAND / UK / UNITED KINGDOM

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Oftalmología / Procedimientos de Cirugía Plástica Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Humans País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: Semin Ophthalmol Asunto de la revista: OFTALMOLOGIA Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: ENGLAND / ESCOCIA / GB / GREAT BRITAIN / INGLATERRA / REINO UNIDO / SCOTLAND / UK / UNITED KINGDOM