ArticleCureus2023
Readability of Online Hand and Upper Extremity Patient Resources.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Readability Analysis of Commonly Cited Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in the Orthopaedic Joint Literature.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
- Both English- and Spanish-Language Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Online Patient Education Materials Are Written at Higher-Than-Recommended Reading Levels.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- A cross-sectional quantitative analysis of the readability and quality of online resources regarding thumb carpometacarpal joint replacement surgery.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2024Article
- Carpal Tunnel Surgery: Can Patients Read, Understand, and Act on Online Educational Resources?The Iowa orthopaedic journal · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Online patient resources regarding hand and upper extremity topics published by professional societies are written at a level that exceeds that of the average reader. Methodology Online patient resources focused on hand and upper extremity topics published by the American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH), the American Association for Hand Surgery (AAHS), and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) were reviewed. The reading material from each topic page was analyzed using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas. The reading level (FKGL) of each topic page was compared against an eighth-grade reading level, which corresponds to the average US reading level. Results A total of 170 online patient resources were reviewed, including 84 from the ASSH, 74 from the AAOS, and 12 from the AAHS. Overall, the mean FKGL was 9.1, and the mean FRE was 57.3. Overall, 50% of all hand and upper extremity online resources were written at or below an eighth-grade reading level. Pairwise testing revealed topic pages written by the ASSH had lower FKGL compared to those written by the AAHS (p = 0.046). Conclusions Online patient resources focused on hand and upper extremity topics are, on average, written at a level that exceeds the ability of the average reader. Comparisons between organizations showed a statistical, but not clinical, difference in readability measures. An emphasis on improving readability should be maintained as professional organizations continue to develop their online patient resources.
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.