Readability of Questionnaires Assessing Listening Difficulties Associated With (Central) Auditory Processing Disorders

Atcherson, Samuel R.; Richburg, Cynthia McCormick; Zraick, Richard I.; George, Cassandra M.

doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2012/11-0055)

Cited by 23 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, the CPSI and the IIEF, including its short form, have a readability level that has to be considered as clearly too difficult according to all tests that were applied. These findings are largely consistent with assessments of questionnaires in other medical fields [56711]. …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Readability assessment of commonly used urological questionnaires

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study was performed to assess readability of the most commonly used questionnaires in urology including a separate analysis of their single-items to identify questions that might be especially demanding for patients.Materials and MethodsThe guidelines of the European Association of Urology were screened for recommended questionnaires. Readability was analyzed for complete questionnaires as well as their single-items separately using well established readability assessment tools, including Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook grade level (SMOG), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), Gunning-Fog Index, and the Flesch Reading Ease formula.ResultsA total of 13 questionnaires were included to the analysis. Calculation of grade levels (FKGL, SMOG, CLI, FGI) showed readability scores of 2.7th to 16.7th grade. Easiest readability as calculated by median grade levels was found for the short form of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaires-Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms short form (FLUTS-SF) while the short form of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) showed the hardest readability. Based on the FKGL between 0% (FLUTS-SF) and 80% (IIEF-5) of the single-items were written above the recommended grade levels.ConclusionsThe questionnaires that are used most frequently in urology mainly show a satisfactory overall readability. Inadequate readability levels were not only found for individual questionnaires but also for single-items of the majority of assessed questionnaires. This requires consideration for the interpretation of results and when developing novel health-related surveys.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…Like similar studies in different fields of medicine [67], they reported on generally satisfactory results. However, all of these studies evaluated the average readability of the complete questionnaires.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 61%

Readability assessment of commonly used urological questionnaires

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Audiologists may incorporate values central to patient-centred care (such as patient engagement, patient narrative, and mutual understanding) into their clinical practice through the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Previous research suggests that the readability of many patient-reported outcome measures available for use within the field of adult audiologic rehabilitation exceed the 4 th to 6 th grade reading level recommended by health literacy experts (Atcherson, Richburg, Zraick, & George, 2013;Atcherson, Zraick, & Brasseux, 2011;Kelly-Campbell, Atcherson, Zimmerman, & Zraick, 2012).…”

Section: Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the 1920s, educators have been using vocabulary and sentence length as a way to predict the apparent difficulty, or readability, of a text (Atcherson et al, 2013;DuBay, 2004). This method has been firmly entrenched with the use of readability formulas, a practice which can boast more than eighty years of application (DuBay, 2004).…”

Section: Readability Formulasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Readability of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Adult Audiologic Rehabilitation

Douglas

Kelly-Campbell

2018

Am J Audiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When developing or reevaluating PROMs designed for use in adult audiologic rehabilitation, researchers should consider ways to improve the readability of their measure, as poor readability may affect the validity of the empirical data collected using the PROM. Additionally, the adequate readability of audiologic PROMs is required if patient/family-centered care values are to be adhered to within the field of adult audiologic rehabilitation.

show abstract

“…As a result, readability formulas continue to be used as the sole judgment tool to assess text in a variety of settings and topics. For example, they are used to evaluate surveys [19], patient information leaflets provided by hospitals [20], or website discussing a variety of topics such as ear tubes [21], speech and language difficulties [22], and nephrology articles on Wikipedia [23] among others.…”

Section: Text Readabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Text Simplification Tools: Using Machine Learning to Discover Features that Identify Difficult Text

Kauchak

Mouradi

Pentoney

et al. 2014

2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although providing understandable information is a critical component in healthcare, few tools exist to help clinicians identify difficult sections in text. We systematically examine sixteen features for predicting the difficulty of health texts using six different machine learning algorithms. Three represent new features not previously examined: medical concept density; specificity (calculated using word-level depth in MeSH); and ambiguity (calculated using the number of UMLS Metathesaurus concepts associated with a word). We examine these features for a binary prediction task on 118,000 simple and difficult sentences from a sentence-aligned corpus. Using all features, random forests is the most accurate with 84% accuracy. Model analysis of the six models and a complementary ablation study shows that the specificity and ambiguity features are the strongest predictors (24% combined impact on accuracy). Notably, a training size study showed that even with a 1% sample (1,062 sentences) an accuracy of 80% can be achieved.

show abstract

Readability of Questionnaires Assessing Listening Difficulties Associated With (Central) Auditory Processing Disorders

Abstract: In an effort to decrease respondent burden, developers should consider readability as another testable psychometric construct. Clinicians should take into account the functional health literacy skills of adult proxy respondents when giving self-administered questionnaires.

Cited by 23 publications

References 52 publications

Readability assessment of commonly used urological questionnaires

Readability assessment of commonly used urological questionnaires

Readability of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Adult Audiologic Rehabilitation

Text Simplification Tools: Using Machine Learning to Discover Features that Identify Difficult Text

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About