Dataset Information

Evaluation of quality and readability of online patient information on osteoporosis and osteoporosis drug treatment and recommendations for improvement.

ABSTRACT: Patient information is important to help patients fully participate in their healthcare. Commonly accessed osteoporosis patient information resources were identified and assessed for readability, quality, accuracy and consistency. Resources contained inconsistencies and scored low when assessed for quality and readability. We recommend optimal language and identify information gaps to address.

Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to identify commonly accessed patient information resources about osteoporosis and osteoporosis drug treatment, appraise the quality and make recommendations for improvement.

Methods

Patient information resources were purposively sampled and text extracted. Data extracts underwent assessment of readability (Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level) and quality (modified International Patient Decision Aid Standards (m-IPDAS)). A thematic analysis was conducted, and keywords and phrases were used to describe osteoporosis and its treatment identified. Findings were presented to a stakeholder group who identified inaccuracies and contradictions and discussed optimal language.

Results

Nine patient information resources were selected, including webpages, a video and booklets (available online), from government, charity and private healthcare providers. No resource met acceptable readability scores for both measures of osteoporosis information and drug information. Quality scores from the modified IPDAS ranged from 21 to 64% (7-21/33). Thematic analysis was informed by Leventhal's Common-Sense Model of Disease. Thirteen subthemes relating to the identity, causes, timeline, consequences and controllability of osteoporosis were identified. Phrases and words from 9 subthemes were presented to the stakeholder group who identified a predominance of medical technical language, misleading terms about osteoporotic bone and treatment benefits, and contradictions about symptoms. They recommended key descriptors for providers to use to describe osteoporosis and treatment benefits.

Conclusions

This study found that commonly accessed patient information resources about osteoporosis have highly variable quality, scored poorly on readability assessments and contained inconsistencies and inaccuracies. We produced practical recommendations for information providers to support improvements in understanding, relevance, balance and bias, and to address information gaps.

SUBMITTER: Crawford-Manning F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8376728 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AIMS AND OBJECTIVES:To evaluate online information on dysmenorrhoea, including readability, credibility, quality and usability. BACKGROUND:Menstrual pain impacts 45%-95% of women of reproductive age globally and is the leading cause of school and work absences among women. Women often seek online information on dysmenorrhoea; however, little is known about the information quality. DESIGN:This was a descriptive study to evaluate online information on dysmenorrhoea. METHODS:We imitated search strategies of the general public. Specifically, we employed the three most popular search engines worldwide-Google, Yahoo and Bing-and used lay search terms, "period pain" and "menstrual cramps." We screened 60 web pages. Following removal of duplicates and irrelevant web pages, 25 met the eligibility criteria. Two team members independently evaluated the included web pages using standardised tools. Readability was evaluated with the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade formulas; credibility, quality and usability were evaluated with established tools. We followed the STROBE checklist for reporting this study. RESULTS:For readability, the mean Flesch-Kincaid level was 10th grade. For credibility, 8% of web pages referenced scientific literature and 28% stated the author's name and qualifications. For quality, no web page employed user-driven content production; 8% of web pages referenced evidence-based guidelines, 32% of web pages had accurate content, and 4% of web pages recommended shared decision-making. Most web pages were interactive and included nontextual information. Some nontextual information was inaccurate. CONCLUSION:Online information on dysmenorrhoea has generally low readability, mixed credibility and variable quality. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE:Strategies to improve health information on dysmenorrhoea include avoiding complex terms, incorporating visual aids, presenting evidence-based information and developing a decision aid to support shared decision-making. Healthcare providers should be aware of the problematic health information that individuals are exposed to and provide education about how to navigate online health information.

Project description:IntroductionFibroadenomas are benign lesions found in the breast tissue. Widespread access to and use of the internet has resulted in more individuals using online resources to better understand health conditions, their prognosis and treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the readability and visual appearance of online patient resources for fibroadenoma.MethodsWe searched GoogleTM, BingTM and YahooTM on 6 July 2022 using the search terms "fibroadenoma", "breast lumps", "non-cancerous breast lumps", "benign breast lumps" and "benign breast lesions" to identify the top ten websites that appeared on each of the search engines. We excluded advertised websites, links to individual pdf documents and links to blogs/chats. We compiled a complete list of websites identified using the three search engines and the search terms and analysed the content. We only selected pages that were relevant to fibroadenoma. We excluded pages which only contained contact details and no narrative information relating to the condition. We did not assess information where links were directed to alternative websites. We undertook a qualitative visual assessment of each of the websites using a framework of pre-determined key criteria based on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services toolkit. This involved assessing characteristics such as overall design, page layout, font size and colour. Each criterion was scored as: +1- criterion achieved; -1- criterion not achieved; and 0- no evidence, unclear or not applicable (maximum total score 43). We then assessed the readability of each website to determine the UK and US reading age using five different readability tests: Flesch Kincaid, Gunning Fog, Coleman Liau, SMOG, and the Automated Readability Index. We compared the readability scores to determine if there were any significant differences across the websites identified. We also generated scores for the Flesh Reading Ease as well as information about sentence structure (number of syllables per sentence and proportion of words with a high number of syllables) and proportion of people the text was readable to.ResultsWe identified 39 websites for readability and visual assessment. The visual assessment scores for the 39 websites identified ranged from -19 to 31 points out of a possible score of 43. The median readability score for the identified websites was 8.58 (age 14-15), with a range of 6.69-12.22 (age 12-13 to university level). There was a statistically significant difference between the readability scores obtained across websites (p<0.001). Almost half of the websites (18/39; 46.2%) were classified as very difficult by the Flesch Reading Ease score, with only 13/39 (33.33%) classified as being fairly easy or plain English.ConclusionWe found wide differences in the general appearance, layout and focus of the fibroadenoma websites identified. The readability of most of the websites was also much higher than the recommended level for the public to understand. Fibroadenoma website information needs to be simplified to reduce the use of jargon and specificity to the condition for individuals to better comprehend it. In addition, their visual appearance could be improved by changing the layout and including images and diagrams.

Project description:BackgroundLipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a highly proatherogenic lipid fraction that is a clinically significant risk modifier. Patients wanting to learn more about Lp(a) are likely to use online patient educational materials (OPEMs). However, the readability of OPEMs may exceed the health literacy of the public.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the readability of OPEMs related to Lp(a). We hypothesized that the readability of these online materials would exceed the sixth grade level recommended by the American Medical Association.MethodsUsing an online search engine, we queried the top 20 search results from 10 commonly used Lp(a)-related search terms to identify a total of 200 websites. We excluded duplicate websites, advertised results, research journal articles, or non-patient-directed materials, such as those intended only for health professionals or researchers. Grade level readability was calculated using 5 standard readability metrics (automated readability index, SMOG index, Coleman-Liau index, Gunning Fog score, Flesch-Kincaid score) to produce robust point (mean) and interval (CI) estimates of readability. Generalized estimating equations were used to model grade level readability by each search term, with the 5 readability scores nested within each OPEM.ResultsA total of 27 unique websites were identified for analysis. The average readability score for the aggregated results was a 12.2 (95% CI 10.9798-13.3978) grade level. OPEMs were grouped into 6 categories by primary source: industry, lay press, research foundation and nonprofit organizations, university or government, clinic, and other. The most readable category was OPEMs published by universities or government agencies (9.0, 95% CI 6.8-11.3). The least readable OPEMs on average were the ones published by the lay press (13.0, 95% CI 11.2-14.8). All categories exceeded the sixth grade reading level recommended by the American Medical Association.ConclusionsLack of access to readable OPEMs may disproportionately affect patients with low health literacy. Ensuring that online content is understandable by broad audiences is a necessary component of increasing the impact of novel therapeutics and recommendations regarding Lp(a).