Literature DB >> 30694156

Readability of Online Patient Educational Materials Related to Breast Lesions Requiring Surgery.

Randy C Miles1, Grayson L Baird1, Paul Choi1, Eniola Falomo1, Elizabeth H Dibble1, Megha Garg1.   

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate readability of websites that are commonly accessed for information on breast lesions requiring surgery. Materials and Methods An internet search using three malignant and eight nonmalignant breast lesions that traditionally require lumpectomy or excisional biopsy as search terms was conducted to identify websites commonly accessed for patient information on breast lesions requiring surgery. Nine websites with information on breast diagnoses were identified based on search engine results for each breast lesion queried. Available patient-directed information was downloaded for each lesion from each website on May 15, 2018. Grade-level readability of downloaded content for each lesion was then determined by using generalized estimating equations, with observations nested within readability metrics from each website. Readability of associated terms breast biopsy, breast cancer, and breast surgery was also evaluated with the same method. Results were compared with American Medical Association (AMA) recommended readability parameters (sixth-grade reading level). All interval estimates were calculated for 95% confidence. Results Average grade level readability score of health information on breast lesions requiring surgery was 11.7, which exceeded the AMA parameters. Information on Wikipedia was written at the highest reading level (grade level readability score, 14.2), while information on the National Institutes of Health website ( http://cancer.gov ) was written at the lowest reading level (grade level readability score, 9.7). Educational materials on malignant breast lesions (grade level readability score, 12.3) were written at a higher reading level than were those on nonmalignant breast lesions (grade level readability score,11.4). Information on the terms breast biopsy (grade level readability score, 10.9), breast cancer (grade level readability score, 10.6), and breast surgery (grade level readability score, 11.1) were all written above a sixth-grade reading level. Conclusion Readability of current online resources on breast biopsy lesions traditionally requiring surgery may be too complex for the general public to comprehend, leading to misinformation and confusion. © RSNA, 2019 See also the editorial by Haygood in this issue.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30694156     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2019182082

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  8 in total

1.  Exploring the Readability of Ingredients Lists of Food Labels with Existing Metrics.

Authors:  Kathryn Cooper; William Gasper; Ricky Flores; Martina Clarke; Erin Bass; Leslie Evans; Jana Ponce
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2022-05-23

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.  Evaluating breast cancer websites targeting Arabic speakers: empirical investigation of popularity, availability, accessibility, readability, and quality.

Authors:  Zahraa Jasem; Zainab AlMeraj; Dari Alhuwail
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2022-05-09       Impact factor: 3.298

4.  Evaluation of patient education materials for stereotactic radiosurgery from high-performing neurosurgery hospitals and professional societies.

Authors:  Michael K Rooney; Daniel W Golden; John Byun; Rimas V Lukas; Adam M Sonabend; Maciej S Lesniak; Sean Sachdev
Journal:  Neurooncol Pract       Date:  2019-07-03

5.  Web-Based Medical Information Searching by Chinese Patients With Breast Cancer and its Influence on Survival: Observational Study.

Authors:  Yan Li; Shan Ye; Yidong Zhou; Feng Mao; Hailing Guo; Yan Lin; Xiaohui Zhang; Songjie Shen; Na Shi; Xiaojie Wang; Qiang Sun
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2020-04-17       Impact factor: 5.428

6.  Understanding shared decision-making experience among vulnerable population: Focus group with food bank clients.

Authors:  Young Ji Lee; Tiffany Brazile; Francesca Galbiati; Megan Hamm; Cindy Bryce; Sandeep Jain; Jennifer Kraschnewski; Kathleen McTigue
Journal:  J Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2020-08-25

7.  Online Patient Education Materials Related to Lipoprotein(a): Readability Assessment.

Authors:  Keon Pearson; Summer Ngo; Eson Ekpo; Ashish Sarraju; Grayson Baird; Joshua Knowles; Fatima Rodriguez
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 5.428

8.  Readability of Online Patient Educational Materials for Coronary Artery Calcium Scans and Implications for Health Disparities.

Authors:  Fatima Rodriguez; Summer Ngo; Grayson Baird; Sujana Balla; Randy Miles; Megha Garg
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2020-08-31       Impact factor: 5.501

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.