The Readability of Online Patient Resources for Skin Cancer Treatment

Dobbs, Tom; Neal, G.E.; Hutchings, Hayley; Whitaker, Iain S.; Milton, James

doi:10.1007/s40487-017-0051-5

Cited by 18 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is our duty as service providers to ensure that the information we provide to patients regarding surgical options is tailored, comprehensive and accessible to patients of all backgrounds and that inequalities in access to surgery are acknowledged, addressed and where possible, surmounted. Our previous work has shown that patient information sheets may not tailor to the average UK reader (44), with 1 in 6 individuals in the UK believed to have a literacy level below that expected of an 11 year old (46), and as a result of this, we are currently working on a bespoke patient information sheet for Microtia to accommodate the variation in literacy skills.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microtia: A Data Linkage Study of Epidemiology and Implications for Service Delivery

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Previous studies of microtia epidemiology globally have demonstrated significant geographical and ethnic variation, cited broadly as affecting 3–5 in 10,000 live births. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of microtia in a largely homogeneous ethnic population in the United Kingdom (Wales) and to identify factors, such as distance and socioeconomic status, which may influence the access to surgical intervention.Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data linkage to identify patients born between 2000 and 2018 with a diagnosis of microtia. Microtia incidence was calculated using annual and geographic birth rates. Surgical operation codes were used to classify patients into those that had no surgery, autologous reconstruction or prosthetic reconstruction. Sociodemographic attributes were compared using descriptive statistics to determine differences in access to each type of surgical intervention.Results: A total of 101 patients were identified, 64.4% were male and the median age was 12 (8–16). The mean annual incidence was 2.13 microtia cases per 10,000 births over the 19-year study period. Both temporal and geographic variation was noted. The majority of patients undergoing surgery opted for autologous reconstruction (72.9%) at a median age of 9 (7–10) compared to 7 (5–8) for prosthetic reconstruction. Autologous reconstruction had a higher median number of surgeries (2, 1–3) than prosthetic (1.5, 1–2) and a higher median socioeconomic status of 3 (2–4) compared to 2 (1–4) for the prosthetic cohort. There were no statistically significant differences in the distance traveled for surgery.Discussion: This study highlights a role for data linkage in epidemiological analyses and provides a revised incidence of microtia in Wales. Although the majority of patients opted for autologous reconstruction, demographic disparities in socioeconomic status warrant further investigation, emphasizing the importance of striving for equity in accessibility to surgical intervention.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microtia: A Data Linkage Study of Epidemiology and Implications for Service Delivery

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, because no formula is 100% accurate, the use of more than 1 readability formula when evaluating written content is preferable to improve the validity of the results. 15 Evaluation of online sources of cancer-related information (eg, screening, treatment) [16][17][18][19] has found that information is written at reading levels above the sixth-or seventh-grade level and thus beyond the ability of the average reader. An assessment of 165 988 trials registered as ClinicalTrials.gov 20 through 2014 reported that, on average, 18 years of education (Master's level) are needed to properly understand the trial descriptions using 4 independent readability algorithms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Readability of Cancer Clinical Trials Websites

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical trials are critically important for the development of new cancer treatments. According to recent estimates, however, clinical trial enrollment is only about 8%. Lack of patient understanding or awareness of clinical trials is one reason for the low rate of participation. The purpose of this observational study was to evaluate the readability of cancer clinical trial websites designed to educate the general public and patients about clinical trials. Nearly 90% of Americans use Google to search for health-related information. We conducted a Google Chrome Incognito search in 2018 using the keywords “cancer clinical trial” and “cancer clinical trials.” Content of the 100 cancer clinical trial websites was analyzed using an online readability panel consisting of Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease, Gunning-Fog Index, Coleman-Liau Index, and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook scales. Reading level difficulty was assessed and compared between commercial versus non-commercial URL extensions. Content readability was found to be “difficult” (10.7 grade level). No significant difference in readability, overall, and between commercial and non-commercial URL extensions was found using 4/5 measures of readability; 90.9% of commercial versus 49.4% of non-commercial websites were written at a >10th grade ( P = .013) using Gunning-Fog Index. Written cancer clinical trials content on the Internet is written at a reading level beyond the literacy capabilities of the average American reader. Improving readability to accommodate readers with basic literacy skills will provide an opportunity for greater comprehension that could potentially result in higher rates of clinical trial enrollment.

show abstract

“…We used the readability formulae: Flesch-Kincaid Grade Index,24 Coleman-Liau Index,25 Simplified Measure of Gobbledygook Index,26 Gunning-Fog Index27 and the Automated Readability Index 28. We chose these readability formulae as they have previously been used to assess readability within the medical field 15 16 23 29–31…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study to evaluate the readability and visual appearance of online resources for blunt chest trauma: an evaluation of online resources using mixed methods

Hutchings,

Cochrane,

Battle

2024

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesBlunt chest trauma (BCT) is characterised by forceful and non-penetrative impact to the chest region. Increased access to the internet has led to online healthcare resources becoming used by the public to educate themselves about medical conditions. This study aimed to determine whether online resources for BCT are at an appropriate readability level and visual appearance for the public.DesignWe undertook a (1) a narrative overview assessment of the website; (2) a visual assessment of the identified website material content using an adapted framework of predetermined key criteria based on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services toolkit and (3) a readability assessment using five readability scores and the Flesch reading ease score using Readable software.Data sourcesUsing a range of key search terms, we searched Google, Bing and Yahoo websites on 9 October 2023 for online resources about BCT.ResultsWe identified and assessed 85 websites. The median visual assessment score for the identified websites was 22, with a range of −14 to 37. The median readability score generated was 9 (14–15 years), with a range of 4.9–15.8. There was a significant association between the visual assessment and readability scores with a tendency for websites with lower readability scores having higher scores for the visual assessment (Spearman’s r=−0.485; p<0.01). The median score for Flesch reading ease was 63.9 (plain English) with a range of 21.1–85.3.ConclusionsAlthough the readability levels and visual appearance were acceptable for the public for many websites, many of the resources had much higher readability scores than the recommended level (8–10) and visually were poor.Better use of images would improve the appearance of websites further. Less medical terminology and shorter word and sentence length would also allow the public to comprehend the contained information more easily.

show abstract

The Readability of Online Patient Resources for Skin Cancer Treatment

Abstract: Introduction: Treatment options for skin cancer vary and to help facilitate the decision-making process many patients will look to online resources. However, general literacy levels in the population are low, making many of these online sources unreadable, worsening

Cited by 18 publications

References 26 publications

Microtia: A Data Linkage Study of Epidemiology and Implications for Service Delivery

Microtia: A Data Linkage Study of Epidemiology and Implications for Service Delivery

Readability of Cancer Clinical Trials Websites

Study to evaluate the readability and visual appearance of online resources for blunt chest trauma: an evaluation of online resources using mixed methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About