Literature DB >> 26829438

Examining the Reading Level of Internet Medical Information for Common Internal Medicine Diagnoses.

Nora Hutchinson1, Grayson L Baird2, Megha Garg3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommend that health materials be written at a grade 6-7 reading level, which has generally not been achieved in online reading materials. Up to the present time, there have not been any assessments focused on the reading level of online educational materials across the most popular consumer Web sites for common internal medicine diagnoses. In this study, we examined the readability of open-access online health information for 9 common internal medicine diagnoses.
METHODS: Nine of the most frequently encountered inpatient and ambulatory internal medicine diagnoses were selected for analysis. In November and December 2014, these diagnoses were used as search terms in Google, and the top 5 Web sites across all diagnoses and a diagnosis-specific site were analyzed across 5 validated reading indices.
RESULTS: On average, the lowest reading grade-level content was provided by the NIH (10.7), followed by WebMD (10.9), Mayo Clinic (11.3), and diagnosis-specific Web sites (11.5). Conversely, Wikipedia provided content that required the highest grade-level readability (14.6). The diagnoses with the lowest reading grade levels were chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (10.8), followed by diabetes (10.9), congestive heart failure (11.7), osteoporosis (11.7) and hypertension (11.7). Depression had the highest grade-level readability (13.8). DISCUSSION: Despite recommendations for patient health information to be written at a grade 6-7 reading level, our examination of online educational materials pertaining to 9 common internal medicine diagnoses revealed reading levels significantly above the NIH recommendation. This was seen across both diagnosis-specific and general Web sites. There is a need to improve the readability of online educational materials made available to patients. These improvements have the potential to greatly enhance patient awareness, engagement, and physician-patient communication. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Health literacy; Internal medicine; Online education; Patient health information; Readability

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26829438     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2016.01.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med        ISSN: 0002-9343            Impact factor:   4.965


  16 in total

1.  Evaluation of the Informational Content, Readability and Comprehensibility of Online Health Information on Monogenic Diabetes.

Authors:  Yue Guan; Kristin A Maloney; Debra L Roter; Toni I Pollin
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-09-26       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  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

3.  Assessment of the Readability, Adequacy, and Suitability of Online Patient Education Resources for Benign Vascular Tumours Using the DISCERN Instrument.

Authors:  Minh N Q Huynh; Katie E Hicks; Claudia Malic
Journal:  Plast Surg (Oakv)       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 0.947

4.  Impact of language preference and health literacy on health information-seeking experiences among a low-income, multilingual cohort.

Authors:  Janet N Chu; Urmimala Sarkar; Natalie A Rivadeneira; Robert A Hiatt; Elaine C Khoong
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2021-08-26

5.  Higher health literacy is associated with better glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes: a cohort study among 1399 Danes.

Authors:  Kasper Olesen; Anne Louise F Reynheim; Lene Joensen; Martin Ridderstråle; Lars Kayser; Helle T Maindal; Richard H Osborne; Timothy Skinner; Ingrid Willaing
Journal:  BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care       Date:  2017-08-29

6.  Readability Assessment of Online Patient Education Material on Congestive Heart Failure.

Authors:  Akhil Kher; Sandra Johnson; Robert Griffith
Journal:  Adv Prev Med       Date:  2017-06-01

Review 7.  Health Literacy and Cardiovascular Disease: Fundamental Relevance to Primary and Secondary Prevention: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Authors:  Jared W Magnani; Mahasin S Mujahid; Herbert D Aronow; Crystal W Cené; Victoria Vaughan Dickson; Edward Havranek; Lewis B Morgenstern; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Amy Pollak; Joshua Z Willey
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 29.690

8.  The Deaf Community's Experiences Navigating COVID-19 Pandemic Information.

Authors:  Tiffany L Panko; Jessica Contreras; Daphine Postl; Ashley Mussallem; Sara Champlin; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Joseph Hill; Melissa A Plegue; Peter C Hauser; Michael McKee
Journal:  Health Lit Res Pract       Date:  2021-06-22

9.  RTAnswers Online Patient Education Materials Deviate From Recommended Reading Levels.

Authors:  Stephen A Rosenberg; Ryan A Denu; David Francis; Craig R Hullett; Michael Fisher; Jessica M Schuster; Michael F Bassetti; Randall J Kimple
Journal:  Appl Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-06-19

10.  Students' attitudes towards impact of the health department website on their health literacy in Semnan University of Medical Sciences.

Authors:  Jamileh Mahdizadeh; Ali Valinejadi; Behnoosh Pooyesh; Fatemeh Jafari; Mehdi Kahouei
Journal:  Electron Physician       Date:  2018-01-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.