Literature DB >> 30876718

Are plain-language summaries included in published reports of evidence about physiotherapy interventions? Analysis of 4421 randomised trials, systematic reviews and guidelines on the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro).

Flávia A Carvalho1, Mark R Elkins2, Márcia R Franco3, Rafael Z Pinto4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A plain-language summary is a short and clearly stated version of a study's results using non-scientific vocabulary that provide many advantages for patients and clinicians in the process of shared decision-making.
OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to investigate the extent to which published reports of physiotherapy interventions provide plain-language summaries. We investigate as the secondary objectives if the available plain-language summaries are at a suitable reading level for a lay person and if inclusion of plain-language summaries in these reports is increasing over time and is associated with trial quality (i.e. PEDro score). DATA SOURCES: All 4421 randomised controlled trials (RCT), systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines that included plain-language summaries indexed on Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of published reports with plain-language summaries, Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL).
RESULTS: The number of published reports with a plain-language summary doubled in the last 6 years. From a total of 34,444 reports indexed on PEDro, only 4421 reports had English plain-language summaries. RCTs with plain-language summaries had higher PEDro scores than RCTs without plain-language summaries (mean difference=0.8 points, 95%CI 0.7 to 0.8). Only 2% of reports were considered at a suitable reading level by the FKGL formula and 0.1% by the FRES formula.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the publication of plain-language summaries is increasing over time, the current number corresponds to only 13% of all published reports. In addition the majority of plain-language summaries are written at an advanced reading level.
Copyright © 2018 Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Health consumer; Health information; Physiotherapy; Readability; Summary report

Year:  2018        PMID: 30876718     DOI: 10.1016/j.physio.2018.11.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Physiotherapy        ISSN: 0031-9406            Impact factor:   3.358


  4 in total

1.  Plain language summaries: A systematic review of theory, guidelines and empirical research.

Authors:  Marlene Stoll; Martin Kerwer; Klaus Lieb; Anita Chasiotis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-06       Impact factor: 3.752

2.  Video abstracts and plain language summaries are more effective than graphical abstracts and published abstracts.

Authors:  Kate Bredbenner; Sanford M Simon
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  How to Put It Plainly? Findings From Two Randomized Controlled Studies on Writing Plain Language Summaries for Psychological Meta-Analyses.

Authors:  Martin Kerwer; Marlene Stoll; Mark Jonas; Gesa Benz; Anita Chasiotis
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-12-16

4.  Conclusiveness, linguistic characteristics and readability of Cochrane plain language summaries of intervention reviews: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Aleksandra Banić; Mahir Fidahić; Jelena Šuto; Rea Roje; Ivana Vuka; Livia Puljak; Ivan Buljan
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2022-09-10       Impact factor: 4.612

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.