2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.12.063
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quality and readability of online patient information for abdominal aortic aneurysms

Abstract: The current quality and readability of online patient information for AAAs is poor and requires significant improvement. Clinicians treating patients with AAAs should be aware of the limitations of the online "lay literature."

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
25
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
3
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The study suggested that patient information material available in the AAO–HNS website was written at a level more complex than recommended by the American Medical Association and National Institutes of Health . The results of our study are also comparable to findings obtained in other surgical specialties, including urology, vascular surgery, and orthopedics …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…The study suggested that patient information material available in the AAO–HNS website was written at a level more complex than recommended by the American Medical Association and National Institutes of Health . The results of our study are also comparable to findings obtained in other surgical specialties, including urology, vascular surgery, and orthopedics …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…The other concern raised involved the validity of some of the popular instruments. A number of the articles in the sample reported conflicting results concerning the ability of DISCERN, HONcode, and JAMA benchmarks to predict health information quality (e.g., Bailey et al, 2012;Barnes, 2009;Hendrick et al, 2012;Tallgren & Backlund, 2009;Tavare et al, 2012;Yeo et al, 2007).…”
Section: Quality Evaluation Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Information is categorized as being of ''easy'' readability if written at this level, ''average'' if assessed between seventhand ninth-grade readability, and ''difficult'' if above this (Table 1) (2). Previous studies have evaluated the readability of online patient information for a variety of medical conditions, including heart disease, cancer, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, thyroid surgery, craniofacial conditions, age-related macular degeneration, orthopedic conditions, dermatological problems, abdominal aortic aneurysm, epilepsy, and Parkinson's disease (Table 2) (2,4,8,9,(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20). Each of these studies determined that the readability of most online patient education materials, using a variety of readability scores, is less than that recommended by USDHHS.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%