ArticleInternational forum of allergy & rhinology2020
Understood? Evaluating the readability and understandability of intranasal corticosteroid delivery instructions.
Article in International forum of allergy & rhinology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pharmacotherapeutic Medication Adherence in Patients With Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2026Pooled it
- Understanding Health Equity in Patient-Reported Outcomes.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2024Review
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practice towards allergic rhinitis in patients with allergic rhinitis: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Relationship between health literacy and disease-specific quality of life in patients with sinonasal disease.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2023Article
- Knowledge of, Attitudes towards, and Practices of Intranasal Corticosteroids Usage among the Allergic Rhinitis Patients of Northern Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Zenker's Diverticulum: Readability and Quality of Online Written Education Materials.Dysphagia · 2022Article
- Evaluation of the techniques and steps of intranasal corticosteroid sprays administration.Asia Pacific allergy · 2022Article
- Intranasal Corticosteroids: Patient Administration Angles and Impact of Education.Rhinology online · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- Analyzing the Readability of Facial Paralysis Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-facialeArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAllergic rhinitis is a widespread disease that has significant quality-of-life ramifications. Symptoms include rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, cough, and postnasal drip. Intranasal corticosteroids are a hallmark of treatment of allergic rhinitis. However, the benefits of treatment are dependent on correct nasal spray technique, of which many patients are not aware. Patient instructions are included with the purchase of these medications. The readability and understandability for these educational materials has been minimally assessed in the medical literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate the readability and understandability of commonly used intranasal steroids.
methodsThree readability measures (Gunning Fog, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook [SMOG], and FORCAST) and an understandability assessment (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Printable Materials [PEMAT-P]) were used to evaluate the instructions for use of commonly prescribed intranasal steroids. Instructions with 6th grade readability level or lower were considered to meet health literacy experts' recommendations. Higher understandability values correlate to easier understandability.
resultsInstructions for 10 intranasal corticosteroid brands were reviewed. Gunning Fog consistently estimated easiest readability, whereas FORCAST estimated most difficult readability. Twenty percent (20%) of analyzed instructions met National Institutes of Health and health literacy experts' recommended reading levels. Understandability of instructions ranged from 33% to 90%, with an average of 66%.
conclusionThe benefit of intranasal corticosteroids is contingent on correct use by patients. However, the prepackaged instructions provided are most often above recommended reading levels and are difficult to understand. Future development of intranasal steroid instructions should meet recommended readability levels and be understandable to maximize their utility.
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.