ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2024
An evaluation of readability and understandability of online education materials for breast cancer survivors.
Article in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of online cancer information for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples: a systematic environmental scan.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Article
- Assessing the Accuracy and Readability of Generative Artificial Intelligence Responses for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Enhancing accessibility and impact of digitally enabled clinical trials: the WeShare engagement and equity toolkit.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2025Review
- Evaluating the Accuracy, Reliability, Consistency, and Readability of Different Large Language Models in Restorative Dentistry.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2025Article
- The Deadly Details: How Clear and Complete Are Publicly Available Sources of Human Rabies Information?Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
- Information quality assessment and content analysis of dementia prevention on WeChat: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Financial toxicity among pediatric oncology families during therapy and early survivorship: a qualitative analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Advocate-BREAST: advocates and patients' advice to enhance breast cancer care delivery, patient experience and patient centered research by 2025.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Readability of Online Blood Cancer Education Materials Across Different Readability Measures.Cureus · 2024Article
- Financial toxicity following surgical treatment for colorectal cancer: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023Article
- 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to determine the availability of existing web-based educational materials on breast cancer survivorship and assess their readability and understandability.
methodsWe identified materials eligible for review in two ways: (1) reviews of websites of major cancer-related organizations (e.g., American Cancer Society); (2) Google searches for breast cancer survivorship, breast cancer, breast cancer follow-up care, and cancer survivorship. We measured Flesch-Kincaid and New Dale Readability of existing breast cancer and breast cancer survivorship materials. Readability grade levels 5 to 8 were considered ideal to acceptable. We used the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) to measure the understandability of 53 videos and 152 written materials, such as booklets and manuals. A resource was considered understandable and/or actionable if it scored ≥ 70% on either the understandability section or the actionability section of the PEMAT.
resultsWe identified a total of 205 existing materials including brochures, booklets, facts sheets, websites, and videos in English. The average Flesch-Kincaid grade score of written educational materials was 9.7 (range 3.5-16.4), which translates to a 9
conclusionPatient educational materials are available online as printable, written materials, and videos and they focus on a wide selection of survivorship-related topics. Most of the breast cancer educational materials that are available online were above an 8 IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Understandable patient education materials are essential for guiding breast cancer survivors towards improving their health outcomes and optimizing their quality of life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35913680What 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.