Cargando…
How readable are Australian paediatric oral health education materials?
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to analyse the readability of paediatric oral health education leaflets available in Australia. METHODS: Forty paediatric oral health education materials were analysed for general readability according to the following parameters: Thoroughness; Textual fra...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4236645/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25183234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-14-111 |
_version_ | 1782345209225412608 |
---|---|
author | Arora, Amit Lam, Andy SF Karami, Zahra Do, Loc Giang Harris, Mark Fort |
author_facet | Arora, Amit Lam, Andy SF Karami, Zahra Do, Loc Giang Harris, Mark Fort |
author_sort | Arora, Amit |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to analyse the readability of paediatric oral health education leaflets available in Australia. METHODS: Forty paediatric oral health education materials were analysed for general readability according to the following parameters: Thoroughness; Textual framework; Terminology; and Readability (Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL), Gunning Fog index (Fog) and Simplified Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG)). RESULTS: Leaflets produced by the industry were among the hardest to read with an average readability at the 8th grade (8.4 ± 0.1). The readability of leaflets produced by the commercial sector was at the 7th grade (7.1 ± 1.7) and the government at the 6th grade (6.3 ± 1.9). The FKGL consistently yielded readabilities 2 grades below the Fog and SMOG indexes. In the content analyses, 14 essential paediatric oral health topics were noted and Early Childhood Caries (ECC) was identified as the most commonly used jargon term. CONCLUSION: Paediatric oral health education materials are readily available, yet their quality and readability vary widely and may be difficult to read for disadvantaged populations in Australia. A redesign of these leaflets while taking literacy into consideration is suggested. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4236645 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42366452014-11-19 How readable are Australian paediatric oral health education materials? Arora, Amit Lam, Andy SF Karami, Zahra Do, Loc Giang Harris, Mark Fort BMC Oral Health Research Article BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to analyse the readability of paediatric oral health education leaflets available in Australia. METHODS: Forty paediatric oral health education materials were analysed for general readability according to the following parameters: Thoroughness; Textual framework; Terminology; and Readability (Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL), Gunning Fog index (Fog) and Simplified Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG)). RESULTS: Leaflets produced by the industry were among the hardest to read with an average readability at the 8th grade (8.4 ± 0.1). The readability of leaflets produced by the commercial sector was at the 7th grade (7.1 ± 1.7) and the government at the 6th grade (6.3 ± 1.9). The FKGL consistently yielded readabilities 2 grades below the Fog and SMOG indexes. In the content analyses, 14 essential paediatric oral health topics were noted and Early Childhood Caries (ECC) was identified as the most commonly used jargon term. CONCLUSION: Paediatric oral health education materials are readily available, yet their quality and readability vary widely and may be difficult to read for disadvantaged populations in Australia. A redesign of these leaflets while taking literacy into consideration is suggested. BioMed Central 2014-09-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4236645/ /pubmed/25183234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-14-111 Text en Copyright © 2014 Arora et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Arora, Amit Lam, Andy SF Karami, Zahra Do, Loc Giang Harris, Mark Fort How readable are Australian paediatric oral health education materials? |
title | How readable are Australian paediatric oral health education materials? |
title_full | How readable are Australian paediatric oral health education materials? |
title_fullStr | How readable are Australian paediatric oral health education materials? |
title_full_unstemmed | How readable are Australian paediatric oral health education materials? |
title_short | How readable are Australian paediatric oral health education materials? |
title_sort | how readable are australian paediatric oral health education materials? |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4236645/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25183234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-14-111 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aroraamit howreadableareaustralianpaediatricoralhealtheducationmaterials AT lamandysf howreadableareaustralianpaediatricoralhealtheducationmaterials AT karamizahra howreadableareaustralianpaediatricoralhealtheducationmaterials AT dolocgiang howreadableareaustralianpaediatricoralhealtheducationmaterials AT harrismarkfort howreadableareaustralianpaediatricoralhealtheducationmaterials |