Readability and Suitability of Online Patient Education Materials for Glaucoma

被引:14
|
作者
Martin, Cole A. [1 ]
Khan, Saima [1 ]
Lee, Rachel [2 ]
Do, Anna T. [3 ]
Sridhar, Jayanth [4 ]
Crowell, Eric L. [1 ]
Bowden, Eileen C. [1 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Austin, Mitchel & Shannon Wong Eye Inst, Dell Med Sch, Austin, TX USA
[2] New York Eye & Ear Infirmary Mount Sina, New York, NY USA
[3] Eye Care San Diego, San Diego, CA USA
[4] Univ Miami, Bascom Palmer Eye Inst, Miller Sch Med, Miami, FL USA
[5] Univ Texas Austin, Mitchel & Shannon Wong Eye Inst, Dell Med Sch, 1601 Trinity St, Bldg B, Austin, TX 78701 USA
来源
OPHTHALMOLOGY GLAUCOMA | 2022年 / 5卷 / 05期
关键词
Accountability; Glaucoma; Patient education; Readability; Suitability; HEALTH LITERACY; MEDICATION ADHERENCE; DECISION-MAKING; INTERNET; INFORMATION; WEB; PROGRESSION; BARRIERS; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1016/j.ogla.2022.03.004
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Purpose: To assess the quality, content, readability, and accountability of information about glaucoma found online.Design: Cross-sectional study.Participants: Thirteen websites containing patient education materials for glaucoma were analyzed in this study.Methods: An online Google search was conducted using the keyword "glaucoma." Thirteen medical website results were selected for analysis. Each website was assessed by 3 independent reviewers for suitability, readability, and accountability. The standardized Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) tool was used to evaluate the quality and content of information on each website. The Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) index, Automated Readability Index (ARI), and Linsear Write Formula (LWF) score were used to assess the readability of the websites. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) accountability benchmarks were used to evaluate each website's accountability. Main Outcome Measures: These included SAM, FRE, FKGL, CLI, SMOG index, ARI, and LWF scores as well as JAMA accountability benchmarks.Results: The average SAM score for all the websites included in this study was 18 points out of a possible 34 points. Eyewiki.org was the lowest-scoring website (11.7 +/- 0.6 points), whereas aao.org and nei.nih.gov were the highest-scoring websites (26.0 +/- 1.0 points and 26.0 +/- 2.6 points, respectively). Three content graders in this study were in moderate agreement (kappa statistic = 0.50). The average FRE score among all the websites was 47.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.3-54.7). The average reading grade score among all the websites was 11.2 (95% CI, 10.0-12.4). Two of the 13 websites (15.4%) satisfied all 4 JAMA accountability criteria.Conclusions: There is significant variation in the content and quality of freely available, online glaucoma education material. The material is generally either not suitable or only adequate for use. Most websites reviewed are written at a reading grade level higher than that recommended for patient education materials. Ophthalmology Glaucoma 2022;5:525-530 (c) 2022 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology
引用
收藏
页码:525 / 530
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Glaucoma
    Cheng, Brian T.
    Kim, Anne B.
    Tanna, Angelo P.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2022, 31 (06) : 438 - 442
  • [2] Readability and Suitability of Online Uveitis Patient Education Materials
    Khan, Saima
    Moon, Jared
    Martin, Cole
    Bowden, Eileen
    Chen, Judy Lynn
    Tsui, Edmund
    Crowell, Eric
    [J]. INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2022, 63 (07)
  • [3] Readability and Suitability of Online Uveitis Patient Education Materials
    Khan, Saima
    Moon, Jared
    Martin, Cole A. A.
    Bowden, Eileen
    Chen, Judy
    Tsui, Edmund
    Crowell, Eric
    [J]. OCULAR IMMUNOLOGY AND INFLAMMATION, 2024, 32 (07) : 1175 - 1179
  • [4] Analysis of the Readability and Accountability of Online Patient Education Materials Related to Glaucoma Diagnosis and Treatment
    Cohen, Samuel A.
    Fisher, Ann Caroline
    Pershing, Suzann
    [J]. CLINICAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2023, 17 : 779 - 788
  • [5] Readability and Suitability Assessment of Patient Education Materials in Rheumatic Diseases
    Rhee, Rennie L.
    Von Feldt, Joan M.
    Schumacher, H. Ralph
    Merkel, Peter A.
    [J]. ARTHRITIS CARE & RESEARCH, 2013, 65 (10) : 1702 - 1706
  • [6] Readability of Online Patient Education Materials Related to IR
    McEnteggart, Gregory E.
    Naeem, Muhammad
    Skierkowski, Dorothy
    Baird, Grayson L.
    Ahn, Sun H.
    Soares, Gregory
    [J]. JOURNAL OF VASCULAR AND INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY, 2015, 26 (08) : 1164 - 1168
  • [7] Readability of online Spanish patient education materials in dermatology
    Rishabh S. Mazmudar
    Anjani Sheth
    Raghav Tripathi
    Jeffrey F. Scott
    [J]. Archives of Dermatological Research, 2021, 313 : 201 - 204
  • [8] Readability Assessment of Online Uveitis Patient Education Materials
    Ayoub, Samantha
    Tsui, Edmund
    Mohammed, Taariq
    Tseng, Joseph
    [J]. OCULAR IMMUNOLOGY AND INFLAMMATION, 2019, 27 (03) : 399 - 403
  • [9] Readability of online patient education materials for velopharyngeal insufficiency
    Xie, Deborah X.
    Wang, Ray Y.
    Chinnadurai, Sivakumar
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, 2018, 104 : 113 - 119
  • [10] Readability of online Spanish patient education materials in dermatology
    Mazmudar, Rishabh S.
    Sheth, Anjani
    Tripathi, Raghav
    Scott, Jeffrey F.
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 2021, 313 (03) : 201 - 204