ArticleBMC health services research2018
Readability of written medicine information materials in Arabic language: expert and consumer evaluation.
Article in BMC health services research, 2018. 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.
- Web-Based Educational Resources for Patients with Sickle Cell Disease: Availability and Reliability.International journal of general medicine · 2024Article
- Readability of information imprinted in patient information leaflets (PILs) in Saudi Arabia: The case of antihypertensive medications.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2022Article
- Provision and Need for Medicine Information in Asia and Africa: A Scoping Review of the Literature.Drug safety · 2021Article
- Knowledge of patients on safe medication use in relation to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWritten Medicine Information (WMI) is one of the sources that patients use to obtain information concerning medicine. This paper aims to assess the readability of two types of WMIs in Arabic language based on vocabulary use and sentence structure using a panel of experts and consumers.
methodsThis is a descriptive study. Two different types of materials, including the online text from King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz Arabic Health Encyclopaedia (KAAHE) and medication leaflets submitted by the manufacturers to the Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA) were evaluated. We selected a group of sentences from each WMI. The readability was assessed by experts (n = 5) and consumers (n = 5). The sentence readability of each measured using a specific criteria and rated as 1 = easy, 2 = intermediate, or 3 = difficult.
resultsA total of 4476 sentences (SFDA 2231; KAHEE 2245) extracted from websites or patient information leaflets on 50 medications and evaluated. The majority of the vocabulary and sentence structure was considered easy by both expert (SFDA: 68%; KAAHE: 76%) and consumer (SFDA: 76%; KAAHE: 84%) groups. The sentences with difficult or intermediate vocabulary and sentence structure are derived primarily from the precautions and side effects sections.
conclusionsThe SFDA and KAAHE WMIs are easy to read and understand as judged by our study sample. However; there is room for improvement, especially in sections related to the side effects and precautions.
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.