ArticleCureus2024
Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for the 10 Most Common Hand Conditions.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of surgical recommendation algorithms in hallux valgus cases using ChatGPT models: an artificial intelligence approach based on 50 simulated scenarios.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Millions of individuals every day turn to the internet for assistance in understanding their hand conditions and potential treatments. While online educational resources appear abundant, there are concerns about whether resources meet the readability recommendations agreed upon by the American Medical Association (AMA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Identifying educational resources that are readable for the majority of patients could improve a patient's understanding of their medical condition, subsequently improving their health outcomes. Methods The readability of the top five websites for the 10 most common hand conditions was examined using the Flesch-Kincaid (FK) analysis, comprising the FK reading ease and FK grade level. The FK reading ease score is an indicator of how difficult a text is to comprehend, while the FK grade level score is the grade level an individual reading a particular text would need to fully understand the text. Results The average FK reading ease was 56.00, which correlates with "fairly difficult (high school)". The average FK corresponded to an eighth-grade reading level, far above the sixth-grade reading level recommendation set by the AMA and NIH. Conclusion Patient education, satisfaction, and the patient-physician relationship can all be improved by providing patients with more readable educational materials. Our study shows there is an opportunity for drastic improvement in the readability of online educational materials. Guiding patients with effective search techniques, advocating for the creation of more readable materials, and having a better understanding of the health literacy barriers patients face will allow hand surgeons to provide more comprehensive care to patients.
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.