SynthesisPloS one2022
Plain language summaries: A systematic review of theory, guidelines and empirical research.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 81 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient Preferences Towards Plain Language Resources During their Multiple Sclerosis Journey: A Qualitative Interview Study.The patient · 2026Article
- A 360 Degree Qualitative Ethical Assessment of Reporting Patient Reported Outcomes.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2026Article
- Helping Parents Explain War to Children: Simplification and Modulated Disclosure.Child psychiatry and human development · 2026Article
- Plain Language Summarization of Environmental Health Research Using Generative AI: Community-Engaged Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Article
- Key Information Influencing Patient Decision-Making About AI in Health Care: Survey Experiment Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- "Now you're talking my language" - Improving health literacy and patient-directed knowledge of scientific abstracts through provision of plain language summaries created by artificial intelligence: A cross sectional infodemiology study.The Ulster medical journal · 2025Article
- Practical guidance on publishing plain-language summaries for scientific manuscripts with an Asia-Pacific audience.BMC research notes · 2025Article
- Processes for Developing Plain Language Versions of Guidelines Recommendations: A Scoping Review.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Improving the cultural responsiveness of measures for Latino families of children with autism.Journal of developmental and physical disabilities · 2025Article
- Using artificial intelligence to expedite and enhance plain language summary abstract writing of scientific content.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Perspectives of people with chronic illness about plain language summaries: a qualitative analysis.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Assessing the Capability of Large Language Model Chatbots in Generating Plain Language Summaries.Cureus · 2025Article
- Article
- Jargon and Readability in Plain Language Summaries of Health Research: Cross-Sectional Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Observational
- A new dimension of simplified science communication: the easiness effect of science popularization in animated video abstracts.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- An Analysis of the Readability of Public-Facing Information Relating to Prevention of Infectious Diseases by Vaccination.British journal of biomedical science · 2025Article
- Literacy and Language Barriers to Overcome in Laboratory Medicine.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Plain language summaries (PLSs) have been introduced to communicate research in an understandable way to a nonexpert audience. Guidelines for writing PLSs have been developed and empirical research on PLSs has been conducted, but terminology and research approaches in this comparatively young field vary considerably. This prompted us to review the current state of the art of the theoretical and empirical literature on PLSs. The two main objectives of this review were to develop a conceptual framework for PLS theory, and to synthesize empirical evidence on PLS criteria. We began by searching Web of Science, PubMed, PsycInfo and PSYNDEX (last search 07/2021). In our review, we included empirical investigations of PLSs, reports on PLS development, PLS guidelines, and theoretical articles referring to PLSs. A conceptual framework was developed through content analysis. Empirical studies investigating effects of PLS criteria on defined outcomes were narratively synthesized. We identified 7,714 records, of which 90 articles met the inclusion criteria. All articles were used to develop a conceptual framework for PLSs which comprises 12 categories: six of PLS aims and six of PLS characteristics. Thirty-three articles empirically investigated effects of PLSs on several outcomes, but study designs were too heterogeneous to identify definite criteria for high-quality PLSs. Few studies identified effects of various criteria on accessibility, understanding, knowledge, communication of research, and empowerment. We did not find empirical evidence to support most of the criteria we identified in the PLS writing guidelines. We conclude that although considerable work on establishing and investigating PLSs is available, empirical evidence on criteria for high-quality PLSs remains scarce. The conceptual framework developed in this review may provide a valuable starting point for future guideline developers and PLS researchers.
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.