ArticleCureus2023
Esophageal Dilation: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Patient Information.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective Complications of esophageal strictures have decreased in recent years due to evolved endoscopic methods. This has primarily been through esophageal dilation. This study examines the level of readability of patient information on esophageal dilation across 40 websites found via internet search. Methods In this cross-sectional readability study, the content of the first 40 websites about "esophageal dilation" and "upper GI endoscopy" found via Google search was analyzed using WebFX (Harrisburg, PA), an established readability tool. Five readability indices, each having a unique mathematical formula, were used to analyze online material. Outputs were then scored and averaged together. Results The aggregate readability of online esophageal dilation was found to be 9.2, corresponding to a ninth-grade reading level. This average was found based on 38 unique, non-duplicated websites evaluated. Conclusions The information currently available on the internet regarding esophageal dilation is considered to be at a difficult reading level for an average patient. There remains a significant amount of development required in the domain of information accessibility to enhance the patient comprehension of invasive procedures they are poised to undergo. It is imperative to refine the articulation of complex procedures further to prepare patients for forthcoming medical procedures.
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.