Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29143222›Full record

ArticleEmergency radiology2018

Quantitative analysis of the level of readability of online emergency radiology-based patient education resources.

David R Hansberry, Michael D'Angelo, Michael D White, Arpan V Prabhu, Mougnyan Cox, Nitin Agarwal, Sandeep Deshmukh

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Emergency radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors.

David R HansberryDepartment of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals, 132 South 10th Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA. david.hansberry@jefferson.edu.
Michael D'AngeloDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Michael D WhiteDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Arpan V PrabhuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Hillman Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Mougnyan CoxDepartment of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals, 132 South 10th Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA.
Nitin AgarwalDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Sandeep DeshmukhDepartment of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals, 132 South 10th Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe vast amount of information found on the internet, combined with its accessibility, makes it a widely utilized resource for Americans to find information pertaining to medical information. The field of radiology is no exception. In this paper, we assess the readability level of websites pertaining specifically to emergency radiology.

methodsUsing Google, 23 terms were searched, and the top 10 results were recorded. Each link was evaluated for its readability level using a set of ten reputable readability scales. The search terms included the following: abdominal ultrasound, abdominal aortic aneurysm, aortic dissection, appendicitis, cord compression, CT abdomen, cholecystitis, CT chest, diverticulitis, ectopic pregnancy, epidural hematoma, dural venous thrombosis, head CT, MRI brain, MR angiography, MRI spine, ovarian torsion, pancreatitis, pelvic ultrasound, pneumoperitoneum, pulmonary embolism, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and subdural hematoma. Any content that was not written for patients was excluded.

resultsThe 230 articles that were assessed were written, on average, at a 12.1 grade level. Only 2 of the 230 articles (1%) were written at the third to seventh grade recommended reading level set forth by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and American Medical Association (AMA). Fifty-two percent of the 230 articles were written so as to require a minimum of a high school education (at least a 12th grade level). Additionally, 17 of the 230 articles (7.3%) were written at a level that exceeded an undergraduate education (at least a 16th grade level).

conclusionsThe majority of websites with emergency radiology-related patient education materials are not adhering to the NIH and AMA's recommended reading levels, and it is likely that the average reader is not benefiting fully from these information outlets. With the link between health literacy and poor health outcomes, it is important to address the online content in this area of radiology, allowing for patient to more fully benefit from their online searches.

Indexed as

ComprehensionDiagnostic ImagingHealth LiteracyInternetPatient Education as TopicGuideline AdherenceHumansHealth literacyReadabilityWebsites

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.