Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35323117›Full record

ArticleJMIR cancer2022

Web-Based Patient Educational Material on Osteosarcoma: Quantitative Assessment of Readability and Understandability.

Trevor Robert Gulbrandsen, Mary Kate Skalitzky, Alan Gregory Shamrock, Burke Gao, Obada Hasan, Benjamin James Miller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors.

Trevor Robert Gulbrandsen *Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6108-3351
Mary Kate Skalitzky *Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6186-8597
Alan Gregory Shamrock *Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3038-3391
Burke Gao *Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0856-2329
Obada Hasan *Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3654-4854
Benjamin James Miller *Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9319-1795

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients often turn to web-based resources following the diagnosis of osteosarcoma. To be fully understood by average American adults, the American Medical Association (AMA) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommend web-based health information to be written at a 6th grade level or lower. Previous analyses of osteosarcoma resources have not measured whether text is written such that readers can process key information (understandability) or identify available actions to take (actionability). The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) is a validated measurement of understandability and actionability.

objectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate web-based osteosarcoma resources using measures of readability, understandability, and actionability.

methodsUsing the search term "osteosarcoma," two independent Google searches were performed on March 7, 2020 (by AGS), and March 11, 2020 (by TRG). The top 50 results were collected. Websites were included if they were directed at providing patient education on osteosarcoma. Readability was quantified using validated algorithms: Flesh-Kincaid Grade Ease (FKGE), Flesch-Kincaid Grade-Level (FKGL). A higher FKGE score indicates that the material is easier to read. All other readability scores represent the US school grade level. Two independent PEMAT assessments were performed with independent scores assigned for both understandability and actionability. A PEMAT score of 70% or below is considered poorly understandable or poorly actionable. Statistical significance was defined as P≤.05.

resultsTwo searches yielded 53 unique websites, of which 37 (70%) met the inclusion criteria. The mean FKGE and FKGL scores were 40.8 (SD 13.6) and 12.0 (SD 2.4), respectively. No website scored within the acceptable NIH or AHA recommended reading level. Only 4 (11%) and 1 (3%) website met the acceptable understandability and actionability threshold. Both understandability and actionability were positively correlated with FKGE (ρ=0.55, P<.001; ρ=0.60, P<.001), but were otherwise not significantly associated with other readability scores. There were no associations between readability (P=.15), understandability (P=.20), or actionability (P=.31) scores and Google rank.

conclusionsOverall, web-based osteosarcoma patient educational materials scored poorly with respect to readability, understandability, and actionability. None of the web-based resources scored at the recommended reading level. Only 4 achieved the appropriate score to be considered understandable by the general public. Authors of patient resources should incorporate PEMAT and readability criteria to improve web-based resources to support patient understanding.

Indexed as

health literacyosteosarcomapatient educationweb-based health information

Identifiers

PMID35323117
PMCPMC8990380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.