Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37288046›Full record

ReviewJournal of children's orthopaedics2023

Readability assessment of patient educational materials for pediatric spinal conditions from top academic orthopedic institutions.

Christopher Michel, Christopher Dijanic, George Abdelmalek, Suleiman Sudah, Daniel Kerrigan, George Gorgy, Praveen Yalamanchili

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of children's orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
11.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The readability of total elbow arthroplasty educational materials.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Artificial Intelligence-Based Large Language Models Can Facilitate Patient Education.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher MichelDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Monmouth Medical Center - RWJBarnabas Health, Long Branch, NJ, USA.
Christopher DijanicDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Monmouth Medical Center - RWJBarnabas Health, Long Branch, NJ, USA.
George AbdelmalekRutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA.
Suleiman SudahDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Monmouth Medical Center - RWJBarnabas Health, Long Branch, NJ, USA.
Daniel KerriganDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Monmouth Medical Center - RWJBarnabas Health, Long Branch, NJ, USA.
George GorgyDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Monmouth Medical Center - RWJBarnabas Health, Long Branch, NJ, USA.
Praveen YalamanchiliDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Monmouth Medical Center - RWJBarnabas Health, Long Branch, NJ, USA.
Monmouth Medical Center · USRutgers New Jersey Medical School

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The Internet has become a popular source of health information for patients and their families. Healthcare experts recommend that the readability of online education materials be at or below a sixth grade reading level. This translates to a standardized Flesch Reading Ease Score between 81 and 90, which is equivalent to conversational English. However, previous studies have demonstrated that the readability of online education materials of various orthopedic topics is too advanced for the average patient. To date, the readability of online education materials for pediatric spinal conditions has not been analyzed. The objective of this study was to assess the readability of online educational materials of top pediatric orthopedic hospital websites for pediatric spinal conditions. Methods: Online patient education materials from the top 25 pediatric orthopedic institutions, as ranked by the U.S. News and World Report hospitals for pediatric orthopedics, were assessed utilizing multiple readability assessment metrics including Flesch-Kincaid, Flesch Reading Ease, Gunning Fog Index, and others. Correlations between academic institutional ranking, geographic location, and the use of concomitant multimedia modalities with Flesch-Kincaid scores were evaluated using a Spearman regression. Results: Only 32% (8 of 25) of top pediatric orthopedic hospitals provided online health information at or below a sixth grade reading level. The mean Flesch-Kincaid score was 9.3 ± 2.5, Flesch Reading Ease 48.3 ± 16.2, Gunning Fog Score 10.7 ± 3.0, Coleman-Liau Index 12.1 ± 2.8, Simple Measure of the Gobbledygook Index 11.7 ± 2.1, Automated Readability Index 9.0 ± 2.7, FORCAST 11.3 ± 1.2, and Dale-Chall Readability Index 6.7 ± 1.4. There was no significant correlation between institutional ranking, geographic location, or use of video material with Flesch-Kincaid scores (p = 0.1042, p = 0.7776, p = 0.3275, respectively). Conclusion: Online educational material for pediatric spinal conditions from top pediatric orthopedic institutional websites is associated with excessively complex language which may limit comprehension for the majority of the US population. Type of study/Level of evidence: Economic and Decision Analysis/level III.

Indexed as

educationalonlinepatientpediatricReadabilityspine

Identifiers

PMID37288046
PMCPMC10242376
OpenAlexW4377041547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.