ArticleGastroenterology research2017
Readability of Healthcare Literature for Gastroparesis and Evaluation of Medical Terminology in Reading Difficulty.
Article in Gastroenterology research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Congenital Hand Differences.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Article
- Readability of Patient Educational Materials in English Versus Arabic.Health literacy research and practice · 2019Article
- Consumer Health Search on the Web: Study of Web Page Understandability and Its Integration in Ranking Algorithms.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastroparesis is a chronic condition that can be further enhanced with patient understanding. Patients' education resources on the Internet have become increasingly important in improving healthcare literacy. We evaluated the readability of online resources for gastroparesis and the influence by medical terminology.
methodsGoogle searches were performed for "gastroparesis", "gastroparesis patient education material" and "gastroparesis patient information". Following, all medical terminology was determined if included on Taber's Medical Dictionary 22nd Edition. The medical terminology was replaced independently with "help" and "helping". Web resources were analyzed with the Readability Studio Professional Edition (Oleander Solutions, Vandalia, OH) using 10 different readability scales.
resultsThe average of the 26 patient education resources was 12.7 ± 1.8 grade levels. The edited "help" group had 6.6 ± 1.0 and "helping" group had 10.4 ± 2.1 reading levels. In comparing the three groups, the "help" and "helping" groups had significantly lower readability levels (P < 0.001). The "help" group was significantly less than the "helping" group (P < 0.001).
conclusionsThe web resources for gastroparesis were higher than the recommended reading level by the American Medical Association. Medical terminology was shown to be the cause for this elevated readability level with all, but four resources within the recommended grade levels following word replacement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.