Evaluating the readability, understandability, and quality of online materials about chest pain in children
- PDF / 986,397 Bytes
- 11 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 8 Downloads / 163 Views
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Evaluating the readability, understandability, and quality of online materials about chest pain in children Derya Arslan 1 & Mahmut Sami Tutar 2 & Betul Kozanhan 3 Received: 15 May 2020 / Revised: 1 August 2020 / Accepted: 4 August 2020 # Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020
Abstract An increasing number of individuals use the Internet to obtain health information. However, online health information is unregulated and highly variable. We aimed to assess the readability, understandability, and quality of online information available for “chest pain in children.” This analysis was performed in January 2020, by inputting the search term “chest pain in children” into Google. The 180 search results were evaluated/categorized. The readability was assessed using the Flesch reading ease score, the Gunning FOG readability score, the Flesch–Kincaid grade level, the Coleman–Liau score, the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook readability score, the Fry readability score, and the automated readability index (ARI). The quality was assessed through the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria. The understandability was evaluated by the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for this study. Sixty-five websites were analyzed (academic and hospital websites (n = 30), physicians and health information websites (n = 35)). Among all websites, the average reading grade level was 9.99. There was no statistical difference between the two groups for the average readability level (p: 0.645). The mean PEMAT score for all websites was 65.09%. There was no statistical difference between the two groups for the average PEMAT score (p: 0.945). For both groups, the understandability score was below 70%. The average JAMA benchmark score was 2.43 ± 1.06, with a statistically significant difference between the academic and hospital websites (2.07 ± 0.91) and physician and health information websites (2.74 ± 1.09, p: 0.009). Conclusion: The readability of online materials available for patients regarding “chest pain in children” was significantly higher than the grade 6 recommended by the National Institutes of Health. The current online health information related to pediatric chest pain may be too difficult for the average reader to read. The quality and understandability were not good for both groups. Improving the readability, understandability, and quality of pediatric health–related online materials has the potential to reduce parental anxiety, improve baseline medical knowledge, and even enhance the physician–parent alliance. What is Known: • The Internet is a widely used source of information for individuals with health problems. However, little is known about the adequacy of such web-based information. In addition, we know that insufficient information has the potential to influence decisions made by individuals. What is New: • We analyzed websites related to chest pain in children for readability, understandability, and quality of information. Most websites were not
Data Loading...
