Arpan V Prabhu1, Ashley L Donovan2, Tudor Crihalmeanu3, David R Hansberry4, Nitin Agarwal5, Sushil Beriwal6, Hrishikesh Kale2, Matthew Heller2. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Hillman Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: prabhuav2@upmc.edu. 2. Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA. 3. West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, WV. 4. Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals, Philadelphia, PA. 5. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Hillman Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA.
Abstract
AIMS: The internet creates opportunities for Americans to access medical information about imaging tests and modalities to guide them in their medical decision-making. Owing to health literacy variations in the general population, the American Medical Association and National Institutes of Health recommend patient education resources to be written between the third and seventh grade levels. Our purpose is to quantitatively assess the readability levels of online radiology educational materials, written for the public, in 20 major university hospitals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In September and October 2016, we identified 20 major university hospitals with radiology residency-affiliated hospital systems. On each hospital׳s website, we downloaded all radiology-related articles written for patient use. A total of 375 articles were analyzed for readability level using 9 quantitative readability scales that are well validated in the medical literature. RESULTS: The 375 articles from 20 hospital systems were collectively written at an 11.4 ± 3.0 grade level (range: 8.4-17.1). Only 11 (2.9%) articles were written at the recommended third to seventh grade levels. Overall, 126 (33.6%) were written above a full high-school reading level. University of Washington Medical Center׳s articles were the most readable with a reading level corresponding to 7.9 ± 0.9. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of websites at major academic hospitals with radiology residencies designed to provide patients with information about imaging were written above the nationally recommended health literacy guidelines to meet the needs of the average American. This may limit the benefit that patients can derive from these educational materials.
AIMS: The internet creates opportunities for Americans to access medical information about imaging tests and modalities to guide them in their medical decision-making. Owing to health literacy variations in the general population, the American Medical Association and National Institutes of Health recommend patient education resources to be written between the third and seventh grade levels. Our purpose is to quantitatively assess the readability levels of online radiology educational materials, written for the public, in 20 major university hospitals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In September and October 2016, we identified 20 major university hospitals with radiology residency-affiliated hospital systems. On each hospital׳s website, we downloaded all radiology-related articles written for patient use. A total of 375 articles were analyzed for readability level using 9 quantitative readability scales that are well validated in the medical literature. RESULTS: The 375 articles from 20 hospital systems were collectively written at an 11.4 ± 3.0 grade level (range: 8.4-17.1). Only 11 (2.9%) articles were written at the recommended third to seventh grade levels. Overall, 126 (33.6%) were written above a full high-school reading level. University of Washington Medical Center׳s articles were the most readable with a reading level corresponding to 7.9 ± 0.9. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of websites at major academic hospitals with radiology residencies designed to provide patients with information about imaging were written above the nationally recommended health literacy guidelines to meet the needs of the average American. This may limit the benefit that patients can derive from these educational materials.
Authors: David R Hansberry; Michael D'Angelo; Michael D White; Arpan V Prabhu; Mougnyan Cox; Nitin Agarwal; Sandeep Deshmukh Journal: Emerg Radiol Date: 2017-11-15
Authors: David A Sallman; Rafael Bejar; Guillermo Montalban-Bravo; Sandra E Kurtin; Alan F List; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Stephen D Nimer; Casey L O'Connell; Dale Schaar; Janice Butchko; Tracey Iraca; Stephanie Searle Journal: Leuk Res Rep Date: 2022-05-25
Authors: Varun Ayyaswami; Divya Padmanabhan; Manthan Patel; Arpan Vaikunth Prabhu; David R Hansberry; Nitin Agarwal; Jared W Magnani Journal: Health Lit Res Pract Date: 2019-04-10
Authors: Michelle M Ernst; Diane Chen; Kim Kennedy; Tess Jewell; Afiya Sajwani; Carmel Foley; David E Sandberg Journal: Int J Pediatr Endocrinol Date: 2019-05-28
Authors: Andy Wai Kan Yeung; Thomas Wochele-Thoma; Fabian Eibensteiner; Elisabeth Klager; Mojca Hribersek; Emil D Parvanov; Dalibor Hrg; Sabine Völkl-Kernstock; Maria Kletecka-Pulker; Eva Schaden; Harald Willschke; Atanas G Atanasov Journal: JMIR Public Health Surveill Date: 2022-03-15