ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2021
Readability Analysis of Patient-Accessible Information Regarding Ambulatory Surgical Center Procedures.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs spine surgery in the ambulatory setting becomes more frequent, patients should comprehend the difference from traditional hospital-based, outpatient settings. Limited research exists on the readability of online articles surrounding spine surgery in the ambulatory surgery center (ASC). In this study, we intend to evaluate the readability of online articles pertaining to spine surgery in the outpatient and ambulatory surgical settings.
methodsThree search engines were queried, and the first 100 articles pertaining to each outpatient spine surgery search term were collected. Advertisements, videos, and peer-reviewed scientific articles were excluded. Articles were categorized by publishing source as follows: hospital or institution, general medical Websites, private practice, or surgery center. Flesch-Kincaid (FK) grade level, Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score, word count, sentences per paragraph, words per sentence, and characters per word were evaluated for each article. Student's
resultsA total of 342 articles was analyzed; 279 articles were outpatient hospital related, and 63 ASC related. Flesch-Kincaid grade levels or FRE scores were not significantly different between outpatient hospital and ambulatory center. Comparison of ASC to outpatient articles from a hospital or institution source significantly differed in FRE score (40.7 versus 32.4) and FK grade level (12.3 versus 13.9; all
conclusionsHospital, private practice, and medical journalists should be aware of significant differences in readability of patient-accessible ASC articles. These articles may be more difficult to read than outpatient hospital articles, and production of more reading-level-appropriate online literature is required. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There is a significant difference in the readability of patient-accessible ASC articles.
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.