Cargando…

3515 Readability of online patient education materials on gynecologic malignancies from major medical associations

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Patients are increasingly using online materials to learn about gynecologic cancer. Recent studies demonstrate that 85-96% of patients with a gynecologic malignancy utilize the Internet as a health resource. Providers can refer patients to educational materials produced by...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Samuel, David, Vilardo, Nicole, Isani, Sara, Gressel, Gregory
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6798963/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.69
_version_ 1783460176654761984
author Samuel, David
Vilardo, Nicole
Isani, Sara
Gressel, Gregory
author_facet Samuel, David
Vilardo, Nicole
Isani, Sara
Gressel, Gregory
author_sort Samuel, David
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Patients are increasingly using online materials to learn about gynecologic cancer. Recent studies demonstrate that 85-96% of patients with a gynecologic malignancy utilize the Internet as a health resource. Providers can refer patients to educational materials produced by major medical associations available on their websites. However, patient educational materials (PEMs) published by professional organizations from other surgical specialties have been shown to be difficult to read for the average American. The NIH and AMA recommend that PEMs be written between a sixth and eighth grade reading level. In this study, we assess the readability of online PEMs on gynecologic cancer published by major medical associations. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Seven national medical association websites with PEMs on gynecologic malignancy were surveyed: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Center for Disease Control, Foundation for Women’s Cancer, National Cancer Institute, National Cervical Cancer Coalition, National Ovarian Cancer Coalition, and Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Online PEMs were identified and analyzed using five validated readability indices. One-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test were performed to detect differences in readability between publishers. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty PEMs were included in this analysis. Mean readability grade levels with standard deviation were: 11.3 (2.8) for Coleman-Liau index; 11.8 (3.2) for Flesch-Kincaid; 11.1 (1.2) for FORCAST formula; 12.5 (2.7) for Gunning FOG formula; 12.1 (2.6) for New Dale-Chall formula; and 13.5 (2.5) for SMOG formula. Overall, PEMs were written at a mean 12(th) grade reading level. Only 4.3% of articles were written at an 8(th) grade reading level or below. ANOVA demonstrated a significant difference in readability between publishing associations (p<0.01). PEMs from the Center for Disease Control had a mean 10(th) grade reading level and were significantly lower than all other organizations. PEMs from The Foundation for Women’s Cancer had a mean 13(th) grade reading level and were significantly higher than most other organizations. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Gynecologic oncology PEMs available from major medical association are written well above the recommended sixth to eight grade reading level. Simplifying PEMs may improve patient understanding of their disease and facilitate physician-patient communication.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6798963
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67989632019-10-28 3515 Readability of online patient education materials on gynecologic malignancies from major medical associations Samuel, David Vilardo, Nicole Isani, Sara Gressel, Gregory J Clin Transl Sci Biomedical Informatics/Health Informatics OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Patients are increasingly using online materials to learn about gynecologic cancer. Recent studies demonstrate that 85-96% of patients with a gynecologic malignancy utilize the Internet as a health resource. Providers can refer patients to educational materials produced by major medical associations available on their websites. However, patient educational materials (PEMs) published by professional organizations from other surgical specialties have been shown to be difficult to read for the average American. The NIH and AMA recommend that PEMs be written between a sixth and eighth grade reading level. In this study, we assess the readability of online PEMs on gynecologic cancer published by major medical associations. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Seven national medical association websites with PEMs on gynecologic malignancy were surveyed: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Center for Disease Control, Foundation for Women’s Cancer, National Cancer Institute, National Cervical Cancer Coalition, National Ovarian Cancer Coalition, and Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Online PEMs were identified and analyzed using five validated readability indices. One-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test were performed to detect differences in readability between publishers. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty PEMs were included in this analysis. Mean readability grade levels with standard deviation were: 11.3 (2.8) for Coleman-Liau index; 11.8 (3.2) for Flesch-Kincaid; 11.1 (1.2) for FORCAST formula; 12.5 (2.7) for Gunning FOG formula; 12.1 (2.6) for New Dale-Chall formula; and 13.5 (2.5) for SMOG formula. Overall, PEMs were written at a mean 12(th) grade reading level. Only 4.3% of articles were written at an 8(th) grade reading level or below. ANOVA demonstrated a significant difference in readability between publishing associations (p<0.01). PEMs from the Center for Disease Control had a mean 10(th) grade reading level and were significantly lower than all other organizations. PEMs from The Foundation for Women’s Cancer had a mean 13(th) grade reading level and were significantly higher than most other organizations. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Gynecologic oncology PEMs available from major medical association are written well above the recommended sixth to eight grade reading level. Simplifying PEMs may improve patient understanding of their disease and facilitate physician-patient communication. Cambridge University Press 2019-03-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6798963/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.69 Text en © The Association for Clinical and Translational Science 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-ncnd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
spellingShingle Biomedical Informatics/Health Informatics
Samuel, David
Vilardo, Nicole
Isani, Sara
Gressel, Gregory
3515 Readability of online patient education materials on gynecologic malignancies from major medical associations
title 3515 Readability of online patient education materials on gynecologic malignancies from major medical associations
title_full 3515 Readability of online patient education materials on gynecologic malignancies from major medical associations
title_fullStr 3515 Readability of online patient education materials on gynecologic malignancies from major medical associations
title_full_unstemmed 3515 Readability of online patient education materials on gynecologic malignancies from major medical associations
title_short 3515 Readability of online patient education materials on gynecologic malignancies from major medical associations
title_sort 3515 readability of online patient education materials on gynecologic malignancies from major medical associations
topic Biomedical Informatics/Health Informatics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6798963/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.69
work_keys_str_mv AT samueldavid 3515readabilityofonlinepatienteducationmaterialsongynecologicmalignanciesfrommajormedicalassociations
AT vilardonicole 3515readabilityofonlinepatienteducationmaterialsongynecologicmalignanciesfrommajormedicalassociations
AT isanisara 3515readabilityofonlinepatienteducationmaterialsongynecologicmalignanciesfrommajormedicalassociations
AT gresselgregory 3515readabilityofonlinepatienteducationmaterialsongynecologicmalignanciesfrommajormedicalassociations