Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32894353›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2020

Evaluating the readability, understandability, and quality of online materials about chest pain in children.

Derya Arslan, Mahmut Sami Tutar, Betul Kozanhan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2020. 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. Patient education resources for oral mucositis: a google search and ChatGPT analysis.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    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

3 authors.

Derya ArslanDepartment of Pediatric Cardiology, University of Health Sciences Turkey, Konya Education and Research Hospital, 42075, Konya, Turkey. aminederya@hotmail.com.
Mahmut Sami TutarDepartment of Anesthesiology and Reanimation Clinic, Konya Numune Hospital, Konya, Turkey.
Betul KozanhanDepartment of Anesthesiology and Reanimation Clinic, University of Health Science Turkey, Konya Education and Research Hospital, Konya, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An increasing number of individuals use the Internet to obtain health information. However, online health information is unregulated and highly variable. We aimed to assess the readability, understandability, and quality of online information available for "chest pain in children." This analysis was performed in January 2020, by inputting the search term "chest pain in children" into Google. The 180 search results were evaluated/categorized. The readability was assessed using the Flesch reading ease score, the Gunning FOG readability score, the Flesch-Kincaid grade level, the Coleman-Liau score, the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook readability score, the Fry readability score, and the automated readability index (ARI). The quality was assessed through the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria. The understandability was evaluated by the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for this study. Sixty-five websites were analyzed (academic and hospital websites (n = 30), physicians and health information websites (n = 35)). Among all websites, the average reading grade level was 9.99. There was no statistical difference between the two groups for the average readability level (p: 0.645). The mean PEMAT score for all websites was 65.09%. There was no statistical difference between the two groups for the average PEMAT score (p: 0.945). For both groups, the understandability score was below 70%. The average JAMA benchmark score was 2.43 ± 1.06, with a statistically significant difference between the academic and hospital websites (2.07 ± 0.91) and physician and health information websites (2.74 ± 1.09, p: 0.009).Conclusion: The readability of online materials available for patients regarding "chest pain in children" was significantly higher than the grade 6 recommended by the National Institutes of Health. The current online health information related to pediatric chest pain may be too difficult for the average reader to read. The quality and understandability were not good for both groups. Improving the readability, understandability, and quality of pediatric health-related online materials has the potential to reduce parental anxiety, improve baseline medical knowledge, and even enhance the physician-parent alliance.

Indexed as

Chest PainComprehensionParentsChildHumansInternetPatient Education as TopicUnited StatesChest painChildrenJAMA benchmark scoreOnline patient informationPEMATReadability

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.