ArticlePerspectives in health information managemen2022
Readability and Suitability of Information Presented on a University Health Center Website.
Article in Perspectives in health information managemen, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The accessibility of general practice websites assessed by patients: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Readability of Informed Consent Forms for Medical and Surgical Clinical Procedures: A Systematic Review.Clinics and practice · 2025Review
- Readability Metrics in Patient Education: Where Do We Innovate?Clinics and practice · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the readability and suitability of a university health center public website. Readability formulas estimated the reading grade and age required for comprehension of health information. The Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) instrument determined adequacy of the webpages for the intended audience. Readability showed the reading grade level, representing the youngest reader able to process the material, ranged from 10.1 to 14.6, averaging 12.5 (midway through 12th grade in the US educational system). Full comprehension required higher education levels, up to postgraduate. Suitability scores for some webpages indicated deficiencies in readability, motivation to learn, and instructions for healthy behavior changes. Content on the website may be difficult for some students to comprehend based on the reading grade level, but overall suitability results are satisfactory. All webpage updates should bear these parameters in mind to ensure content is fully accessible to college students, faculty, and staff.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36348731PMC9635048What 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.