ArticleDisaster medicine and public health preparedness2020
An Evaluation of the Literacy Demands of Online Natural Disaster Preparedness Materials for Families.
Article in Disaster medicine and public health preparedness, 2020. 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.
- Mapping risk communication practices in public health emergencies: a scoping review and comparison with Italian regional pandemic plans.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Communication in disasters to support families with children with medical complexity and special healthcare needs: a rapid scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Organizational Health Literacy as a Tool for Health Equity: Application in a High-Risk Infant Follow-Up Program.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Children and Adolescents with Disabilities and Exposure to Disasters, Terrorism, and the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Scoping Review.Current psychiatry reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveNatural disasters are becoming increasingly common, but it is unclear whether families can comprehend and use available resources to prepare for such emergencies. The objective of this study was to evaluate the literacy demands of risk communication materials on natural disasters for US families with children.
methodsIn January 2018, we assessed 386 online self-directed learning resources related to emergency preparedness for natural disasters using 5 literacy assessment tools. Assessment scores were compared by information source, audience type, and disaster type.
resultsOne-in-three websites represented government institutions, and 3/4 were written for a general audience. Nearly 1-in-5 websites did not specify a disaster type. Assessment scores suggest a mismatch between the general population's literacy levels and literacy demands of materials in the areas of readability, complexity, suitability, web usability, and overall audience appropriateness. Materials required more years of education beyond the grade level recommended by prominent health organizations. Resources for caregivers of children generally and children with special health care needs possessed lower literacy demands than materials overall, for most assessment tools.
conclusionsRisk communication and public health agencies could better align the literacy demands of emergency preparedness materials with the literacy capabilities of the general public.
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.