ArticlePublic health2020
Readability of online patient education material for the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19): a cross-sectional health literacy study.
Article in Public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Does socioeconomic position moderate the associations between the content and delivery features of digital behaviour change interventions for smoking cessation and intervention effectiveness? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Health psychology review · 2024Pooled it
- Quality of web-based information about the coronavirus disease 2019: a rapid systematic review of infodemiology studies published during the first year of the pandemic.BMC public health · 2022Pooled it
- Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Myopia Management.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Article
- Health Literacy and Usability of Public Health Websites for COVID-19 Vaccine Search.Health literacy research and practice · 2026Article
- Access to information in deaf and hard-of-hearing people.PloS one · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Readability, Accessibility, and Quality of Online Health Information on Opioid Use Disorder: A Comparative Analysis of Government and Non-Government Websites.Advances in health information science and practice · 2026Article
- Summary of best evidence for safe management of vasopressors through peripheral intravenous catheters.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Global Evidence on the Sustainability of Telemedicine in Outpatient and Primary Care During the First 2 Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review Using the Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) Framework.Interactive journal of medical research · 2025Review
- What Do People Want to Know About Cochlear Implants: A Google Analytic Study.The Laryngoscope · 2025Observational
- An Analysis of the Readability of Public-Facing Information Relating to Prevention of Infectious Diseases by Vaccination.British journal of biomedical science · 2025Article
- Conclusiveness, readability and textual characteristics of plain language summaries from medical and non-medical organizations: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Review
- Readability and content gaps in online epilepsy surgery materials as potential health literacy and shared-decision-making barriers.Epilepsia open · 2023Article
- A pilot study on the capability of artificial intelligence in preparation of patients' educational materials for Indian public health issues.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2023Article
- Lessons to Build an Educational Model for Higher Education Institutions Defined as Anchor Institutions to Tackle Public Health Crises: A Pilot Study on COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Faculty and Students in Hebert L. College in the Bronx, NY.Journal of Hispanic higher education · 2023Article
- Article
- Promoting Health Education through Mobile Apps: A Quantitative Analysis of American Hospitals.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Assessing COVID-19 Health Literacy (CoHL) and its relationships with sociodemographic features, locus of control and compliance with social distancing rules during the first lockdown in France.Health education research · 2022Article
- Readability, understandability and language accessibility of Swedish websites about the coronavirus disease 2019: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe internet has become one of the most important resources for the general population when searching for healthcare information. However, the information available is not always suitable for all readers because of its difficult readability. We sought to assess the readability of online information regarding the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and establish whether they follow the patient educational information reading level recommendations. STUDY
designThis is a cross-sectional study.
methodsWe searched five key terms on Google and the first 30 results from each of the searches were considered for analysis. Five validated readability tests were utilized to establish the reading level for each article.
resultsOf the 150 gathered articles, 61 met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated. None (0%) of the articles met the recommended 5th to 6th grade reading level (of an 11-12-year-old). The mean readability scores were Flesch Reading Ease 44.14, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level 12.04, Gunning-Fog Index 14.27, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook SMOG Index 10.71, and Coleman-Liau Index 12.69.
conclusionsOnline educational articles on COVID-19 provide information too difficult to read for the general population. The readability of articles regarding COVID-19 and other diseases needs to improve so that the general population may understand health information better and may respond adequately to protect themselves and limit the spread of infection.
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.