ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2023
Health Information on Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis From Search Engines and Twitter: Readability Analysis.
Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigating Older Adults' Use of a Socially Assistive Robot via Time Series Clustering and User Profiling: Descriptive Analysis Study.JMIR formative research · 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is proven to prevent HIV infection. However, PrEP uptake to date has been limited and inequitable. Analyzing the readability of existing PrEP-related information is important to understand the potential impact of available PrEP information on PrEP uptake and identify opportunities to improve PrEP-related education and communication.
objectiveWe examined the readability of web-based PrEP information identified using search engines and on Twitter. We investigated the readability of web-based PrEP documents, stratified by how the PrEP document was obtained on the web, information source, document format and communication method, PrEP modality, and intended audience.
methodsWeb-based PrEP information in English was systematically identified using search engines and the Twitter API. We manually verified and categorized results and described the method used to obtain information, information source, document format and communication method, PrEP modality, and intended audience. Documents were converted to plain text for the analysis and readability of the collected documents was assessed using 4 readability indices. We conducted pairwise comparisons of readability based on how the PrEP document was obtained on the web, information source, document format, communication method, PrEP modality, and intended audience, then adjusted for multiple comparisons.
resultsA total of 463 documents were identified. Overall, the readability of web-based PrEP information was at a higher level (10.2-grade reading level) than what is recommended for health information provided to the general public (ninth-grade reading level, as suggested by the Department of Health and Human Services). Brochures (n=33, 7% of all identified resources) were the only type of PrEP materials that achieved the target of ninth-grade reading level.
conclusionsWeb-based PrEP information is often written at a complex level for potential and current PrEP users to understand. This may hinder PrEP uptake for some people who would benefit from it. The readability of PrEP-related information found on the web should be improved to align more closely with health communication guidelines for reading level to improve access to this important health information, facilitate informed decisions by those with a need for PrEP, and realize national prevention goals for PrEP uptake and reducing new HIV infections in the United States.
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.