Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T16:58:09.101Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2019

David Samuel
Affiliation:
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Nicole Vilardo
Affiliation:
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Sara Isani
Affiliation:
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Gregory Gressel
Affiliation:
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

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 12th grade reading level. Only 4.3% of articles were written at an 8th 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 10th grade reading level and were significantly lower than all other organizations. PEMs from The Foundation for Women’s Cancer had a mean 13th 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.

Type
Biomedical Informatics/Health Informatics
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
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.
Copyright
© The Association for Clinical and Translational Science 2019