Literature DB >> 26486024

Analysis of online patient education materials in pediatric ophthalmology.

Ann M John1, Elizabeth S John2, David R Hansberry3, Prashant J Thomas4, Suqin Guo1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients increasingly consult online resources for healthcare information. The American Medical Association (AMA) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommend that online education resources be written between a 3rd- and 7th-grade level. This study assesses whether online health information abides by these guidelines.
METHODS: Ten pediatric ophthalmology conditions were entered into a commonly used search engine, Google.com, and analyzed using 10 validated readability scales. Scientific articles and articles written on patient forums were excluded. The 10 conditions--amblyopia, cataract, conjunctivitis, corneal abrasion, nystagmus, retinoblastoma, retinopathy of prematurity, strabismus, stye, and glaucoma--were also searched and analyzed separately from widely used websites, including Wikipedia and WebMD, as well as those of professional societies, including the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS) and the American Optometric Association (AOA).
RESULTS: The majority of articles were written above recommended guidelines. All scales showed that the 100 articles were written at a mean grade-level of 11.75 ± 2.72. Only 12% of articles were written below a 9th-grade level and only 3% met recommended criteria. The articles accrued separately from Wikipedia, WebMD, AAPOS, and AOA also had average grade levels above the recommended guidelines.
CONCLUSIONS: The readability of online patient education material exceeds NIH and AMA guidelines. This disparity can adversely affect caregiver comprehension of such resources and contribute to poor decision making. Pediatric ophthalmology online articles are generally written at a level too high for average caregiver comprehension. Revision of articles can increase satisfaction, improve outcomes, and facilitate the patient-ophthalmologist relationship. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26486024     DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2015.07.286

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J AAPOS        ISSN: 1091-8531            Impact factor:   1.220


  6 in total

1.  Readability of English, German, and Russian Disease-Related Wikipedia Pages: Automated Computational Analysis.

Authors:  Jelizaveta Gordejeva; Richard Zowalla; Monika Pobiruchin; Martin Wiesner
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2022-05-16       Impact factor: 7.076

Review 2.  Readability of patient education materials in ophthalmology: a single-institution study and systematic review.

Authors:  Andrew M Williams; Kelly W Muir; Jullia A Rosdahl
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 2.209

Review 3.  Health Equity and Disparities in ROP Care: A Need for Systematic Evaluation.

Authors:  Tochukwu Ndukwe; Emily Cole; Angelica C Scanzera; Margaret A Chervinko; Michael F Chiang; John Peter Campbell; Robison Vernon Paul Chan
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 3.569

4.  Assessment of patient education materials for age-related macular degeneration.

Authors:  Elisa Wang; Michael Kalloniatis; Angelica Ly
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 3.992

5.  Patient knowledge, experiences and preferences regarding retinoblastoma and research: A qualitative study.

Authors:  Catherine Moses; Kaitlyn Flegg; Helen Dimaras
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2020-02-29       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Assessment of online patient education materials designed for people with age-related macular degeneration.

Authors:  Jennifer Fortuna; Anne Riddering; Linda Shuster; Cassie Lopez-Jeng
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 2.209

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.