ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2023
Analysis of the Readability and Accountability of Online Patient Education Materials Related to Glaucoma Diagnosis and Treatment.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2023. 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.
- Evaluating the Use of Large Language Models in Improving the Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Peripheral Nerve Surgery.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Myopia Management.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Article
- Accuracy and Readability of Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer-4 Omni in Answering Ophthalmology Patient Questions.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Online platform vs. doctors: a comparative exploration of congenital cataract patient education from virtual to reality.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- A Performance Evaluation of Large Language Models in Keratoconus: A Comparative Study of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4.0, Gemini, Copilot, Chatsonic, and Perplexity.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Performance of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots on Glaucoma Questions Adapted From Patient Brochures.Cureus · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Reporting Quality of Glaucoma Randomized Controlled Trial Abstracts: Current Status and Future Perspectives.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
- Appropriateness and readability of Google Bard and ChatGPT-3.5 generated responses for surgical treatment of glaucoma.Romanian journal of ophthalmologyArticle
- Comparing the Accuracy and Readability of Glaucoma-related Question Responses and Educational Materials by Google and ChatGPT.Journal of current glaucoma practiceArticle
- Google Trends-Assisted Analysis of the Readability, Accountability, and Accessibility of Online Patient Education Materials for the Treatment of AMD After US FDA Approval of Pegcetacoplan.Journal of vitreoretinal diseasesArticle
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
Purpose: To assess the readability and accountability of online patient education materials related to glaucoma diagnosis and treatment. Methods: We conducted a Google search for 10 search terms related to glaucoma diagnosis and 10 search terms related to glaucoma treatment. For each search term, the first 10 patient education websites populated after Google search were assessed for readability and accountability. Readability was assessed using five validated measures: Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and New Dale-Chall (NDC). Accountability was assessed using the Results: Of the 200 total websites analyzed, only 11% were written at or below the recommended 6th grade reading level. The average FRE and grade level for 100 glaucoma diagnosis-related articles were 42.02 ± 1.08 and 10.53 ± 1.30, respectively. The average FRE and grade level for 100 glaucoma treatment-related articles were 43.86 ± 1.01 and 11.29 ± 1.54, respectively. Crowdsourced articles were written at the highest average grade level (12.32 ± 0.78), followed by articles written by private practice/independent users (11.22 ± 1.74), national organizations (10.92 ± 1.24), and educational institutions (10.33 ± 1.35). Websites averaged 1.12 ± 1.15 of 4 Conclusion: Despite wide variation in the readability and accountability of online patient education materials related to glaucoma diagnosis and treatment, patient education materials are consistently written at levels above the recommended reading level and often lack accountability. Articles from educational institutions and national organizations were often written at lower reading levels but are less frequently encountered after Google search. There is a need for accurate and understandable online information that glaucoma patients can use to inform decisions about their eye health.
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.