Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35928178›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2022

Can Patients Read, Understand, and Act on Online Resources for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Surgery?

Burke Gao, Alan G Shamrock, Trevor R Gulbrandsen, Olivia C O'Reilly, Kyle R Duchman, Robert W Westermann, Brian R Wolf

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The role of generative artificial intelligence in deciding fusion treatment of lumbar degeneration: a comparative analysis and narrative review.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Burke GaoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Alan G ShamrockDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Trevor R GulbrandsenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Olivia C O'ReillyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Kyle R DuchmanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Robert W WestermannDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Brian R WolfDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Patients undergoing elective procedures often utilize online educational materials to familiarize themselves with the surgical procedure and expected postoperative recovery. While the Internet is easily accessible and ubiquitous today, the ability of patients to read, understand, and act on these materials is unknown. Purpose: To evaluate online resources about anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery utilizing measures of readability, understandability, and actionability. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Using the term "ACL surgery," 2 independent searches were performed utilizing a public search engine (Google.com). Patient education materials were identified from the top 50 results. Audiovisual materials, news articles, materials intended for advertising or medical professionals, and materials unrelated to ACL surgery were excluded. Readability was quantified using the Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, Coleman-Liau Index, Automated Readability Index, and Gunning Fog Index. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Printable Materials (PEMAT-P) was utilized to assess the actionability and understandability of materials. For each online source, the relationship between its Google search rank (from first to last) and its readability, understandability, and actionability was calculated utilizing the Spearman rank correlation coefficient (ρ Results: Overall, we identified 68 unique websites, of which 39 met inclusion criteria. The mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level was 10.08 ± 2.34, with no website scoring at or below the 6th-grade level. Mean understandability and actionability scores were 59.18 ± 10.86 (range, 33.64-79.17) and 34.41 ± 22.31 (range, 0.00-81.67), respectively. Only 5 (12.82%) and 1 (2.56%) resource scored above the 70% adequate PEMAT-P threshold mark for understandability and actionability, respectively. Readability (lowest Conclusion: Patient education materials on ACL surgery scored poorly with respect to readability, understandability, and actionability. No online resource scored at the recommended reading level of the American Medical Association or National Institutes of Health. Only 5 resources scored above the proven threshold for understandability, and only 1 resource scored above it for actionability.

Indexed as

ACL reconstructionACL surgeryonline materialsPEMAT

Identifiers

PMID35928178
PMCPMC9344126
OpenAlexW4288388910

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.