Literature DB >> 20303519

Readability of health related quality of life instruments in urology.

Jonathan Bergman1, John L Gore, Jennifer S Singer, Jennifer T Anger, Mark S Litwin.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The average American adult reads at a fifth to eighth-grade level, with wide variability, presenting challenges for the assessment of self-reported health related quality of life. We identified the health related quality of life instruments used in patients with urological diseases and evaluated their readability.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We focused on the most burdensome urological diseases, based on total expenditures in the United States. We then identified disease specific instruments by systematically searching PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Google, Google Scholar, the Patient Reported Outcome and Quality of Life Instruments Database (Mapi Research Institute, Lyon, France) and Yahoo! for health related quality of life studies in patients with these urological conditions. Where disease specific instruments were lacking, we noted the general health related quality of life measures most commonly used. For each instrument, we calculated the median Flesch-Kincaid grade level, the proportion of questionnaire items below an eighth-grade reading level, the mean Flesch Reading Ease, and the mean number of words per sentence and characters per word, all of which are validated measures of readability.
RESULTS: The average +/- SD of the median Flesh-Kincaid reading levels was 6.5 +/- 2.1 (range 1.0 to 12.0). Of the 76 instruments 61 (80%) were at or below an eighth-grade reading level. The mean reading ease was greater than 30 for each of the 76 questionnaires and greater than 60 for 66 (87%). Urinary tract infection, the costliest urological disease, has only 1 disease specific health related quality of life measure. Urolithiasis, the second costliest, has none.
CONCLUSIONS: The reading level of health related quality of life questionnaires in urology is appropriate for the reading ability of most adults in the United States. However, the most burdensome urological diseases lack disease specific health related quality of life instruments. 2010 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20303519     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.12.107

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  8 in total

Review 1.  Toward Ensuring Health Equity: Readability and Cultural Equivalence of OMERACT Patient-reported Outcome Measures.

Authors:  Jennifer Petkovic; Jonathan Epstein; Rachelle Buchbinder; Vivian Welch; Tamara Rader; Anne Lyddiatt; Rosemary Clerehan; Robin Christensen; Annelies Boonen; Niti Goel; Lara J Maxwell; Karine Toupin-April; Maarten De Wit; Jennifer Barton; Caroline Flurey; Janet Jull; Cheryl Barnabe; Antoine G Sreih; Willemina Campbell; Christoph Pohl; Mehmet Tuncay Duruöz; Jasvinder A Singh; Peter S Tugwell; Francis Guillemin
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2015-06-15       Impact factor: 4.666

2.  An economic perspective on urinary tract infection: the "costs of resignation".

Authors:  Oriana Ciani; Daniele Grassi; Rosanna Tarricone
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.859

3.  Readability of common health-related quality-of-life instruments in female pelvic medicine.

Authors:  Alexandriah N Alas; Jonathan Bergman; Gena C Dunivan; Rezoana Rashid; Shelby N Morrisroe; Rebecca G Rogers; Jennifer T Anger
Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg       Date:  2013 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.091

4.  Readability Assessment of Commonly Used German Urological Questionnaires.

Authors:  Pavel Lyatoshinsky; Manolis Pratsinis; Dominik Abt; Hans-Peter Schmid; Valentin Zumstein; Patrick Betschart
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2019-10-01

5.  Comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcome questionnaire response rates between patients treated surgically for renal cell carcinoma and prostate carcinoma.

Authors:  David D Thiel; Andrew J Davidiuk; Gregory A Broderick; Michelle Arnold; Nancy Diehl; Andrea Tavlarides; Kaitlynn Custer; Alexander S Parker
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 2.264

6.  How Readable Is BPH Treatment Information on the Internet? Assessing Barriers to Literacy in Prostate Health.

Authors:  Kevin Koo; Ronald L Yap
Journal:  Am J Mens Health       Date:  2016-11-30

7.  Basic issues concerning health-related quality of life.

Authors:  Roman Sosnowski; Marta Kulpa; Urszula Ziętalewicz; Jan Karol Wolski; Robert Nowakowski; Robert Bakuła; Tomasz Demkow
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2017-04-13

8.  Readability assessment of commonly used urological questionnaires.

Authors:  Patrick Betschart; Dominik Abt; Hans-Peter Schmid; Pascal Viktorin; Janine Langenauer; Valentin Zumstein
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2018-08-02
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.