ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2022
Assessment of the readability and quality of online patient education materials for the medical treatment of open-angle glaucoma.
Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Do bots provide correct and adequate guidance regarding acidity: A blinded comparison rated by patients and physicians.World journal of methodology · 2026Article
- Comparing the readability of online patient education materials for LASIK and cataract surgery.International ophthalmology · 2026Article
- When Large Language Models (LLMs) walk into a Bachelor's in optometry examination: Comparing the performances of LLMs and bachelor of optometry students.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Utility of ChatGPT-4o in Creating Patient Handouts in Ophthalmology: A Comparison With American Academy of Ophthalmology Educational Materials.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Accuracy and Readability of Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer-4 Omni in Answering Ophthalmology Patient Questions.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Analyzing accessibility and suitability of online Krabbe disease resources.Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Are Artificial Intelligence-generated Patient Leaflets Ready for Clinical Use? A Readability Comparison across Common Orthopaedic Procedures.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence Versus Professional Standards: A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study of GPT, Gemini, and ENT UK in Delivering Patient Information on ENT Conditions.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Large Language Models: Pioneering New Educational Frontiers in Childhood Myopia.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Leveraging large language models to improve patient education on dry eye disease.Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
- An Analysis of the Readability of Public-Facing Information Relating to Prevention of Infectious Diseases by Vaccination.British journal of biomedical science · 2025Article
- Readability Metrics in Patient Education: Where Do We Innovate?Clinics and practice · 2024Article
- How Readable Is the Information the United Kingdom's Statutory Health and Social Care Professional Regulators Provide for the Public to Engage With Fitness to Practise Processes?Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Search for medical information for chronic rhinosinusitis through an artificial intelligence ChatBot.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2024Article
- Performance of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots on Glaucoma Questions Adapted From Patient Brochures.Cureus · 2024Article
- Interventional Glaucoma: Improving the Patient-Provider Educational Exchange.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Comparing the Ability of Google and ChatGPT to Accurately Respond to Oculoplastics-Related Patient Questions and Generate Customized Oculoplastics Patient Education Materials.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Improving health literacy of antibiotic use in people with cystic fibrosis (CF)-comparison of the readability of patient information leaflets (PILs) from the EU, USA and UK of 23 CF-related antibiotics used in the treatment of CF respiratory infections.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2023Article
- The Readability and Quality of Web-Based Patient Information on Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: Quantitative Content Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Appropriateness and readability of Google Bard and ChatGPT-3.5 generated responses for surgical treatment of glaucoma.Romanian journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Patient adherence to glaucoma medications is poor, and is linked to low literacy levels. Patients commonly use the internet to access health information, and it is recommended that patient information is written at an 11-year-old reading level. The aim of this study is to assess the readability and quality of online patient education materials for the medical management of open angle glaucoma. Methods and analysis: The top 10 relevant Google searches for nine glaucoma medications (timolol, brimonidine, apraclonidine, dorzolamide, latanoprost, bimatoprost, travoprost, tafluprost and brinzolamide) and three generic searches were analysed for readability and accountability. Readability was assessed using Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog Index (GFI) and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook Index (SMOG). Webpages were classified by source and assessed using Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks of accountability. Results: 111 articles were included in the analysis. Mean readability scores were: FRES 55.5 (95% CI 53.4 to 57.5); FKGL 9.7 (95% CI 9.3 to 10.0); GFI 12 (95% CI 11.6 to 12.4) and SMOG 9.3 (95% CI 8.9 to 9.6). One-way analysis of variance demonstrated no significant difference in readability score between source type. 9% of the webpages satisfied all 4 JAMA benchmarks. Pearson's correlation coefficient showed a correlation between the FRES and accountability score (r=0.19, p=0.045). Conclusion: The majority of online patient education materials for the medical treatment of glaucoma are written at a level too difficult for the general population and fail to meet accountability standards.
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.