Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27172259›Full record

ArticlePreventing chronic disease2016

A Mismatch Between Patient Education Materials About Sickle Cell Disease and the Literacy Level of Their Intended Audience.

Elizabeth McClure, Jared Ng, Kelly Vitzthum, Rima Rudd

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventing chronic disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04917783 (Health Literacy), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04917783 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Health Literacy: A Randomized Controlled Trial to Investigate a Novel Feedback Tool for Neurocognitive Screening in Pediatric Sickle Cell Disease

TypeinterventionalSponsorMedical College of WisconsinRan2019 to 2021Enrolled46ConditionsSickle Cell DiseaseArmsPassport Card, No Passport card
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Design and Refinement of CyberCellJournal of medical extended reality · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Elizabeth McClureUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill - Epidemiology, 135 Dauer Dr, 2101 McGavran-Greenberg Hall, CB No 7435, Chapel Hill, NC 27599. Email: emcclure@unc.edu. Ms. McClure is also affiliated with Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences.
Jared NgHarvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Boston, Massachusetts.
Kelly VitzthumHarvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Boston, Massachusetts.
Rima RuddHarvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite the first goal of the 2010 National Action Plan to Improve Health Literacy, the literacy demands of much health information exceeds the reading skills of most US adults. The objective of this study was to assess the health literacy level of publicly available patient education materials for people with sickle cell disease (SCD).

methodsWe used 5 validated tools to evaluate 9 print and 4 online patient education materials: the simple measure of gobbledygook (SMOG) to assess reading grade level, the Peter Mosenthal and Irwin Kirsch readability formula (PMOSE/IKIRSCH) to assess structure and density, the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) to assess actionability (how well readers will know what to do after reading the material) and understandability, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Clear Communication Index (Index) to obtain a comprehensive literacy demand score, and the Printed Cancer Education Materials for African Americans Cultural Sensitivity Assessment Tool.

resultsMaterials' scores reflected high reading levels ranging from 8th grade to 12th grade, appropriate (low) structural demand, and low actionability relative to understandability. CDC suggests that an appropriate Index score should fall in or above the 90th percentile. The scores yielded by materials evaluated in this assessment ranged from the 44th to the 76th percentiles. Eight of the 13 materials scored within the acceptable range for cultural sensitivity.

conclusionReading levels of available patient education materials exceed the documented average literacy level of the US adult population. Health literacy demands should be a key consideration in the revision and development of patient education materials for people with SCD.

Indexed as

Anemia, Sickle CellInternetHealth LiteracyHumansPatient Education as TopicPublic Health

Identifiers

PMID27172259
PMCPMC4867305

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.