ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2024
Readability assessment of Spanish online patient education materials in gynecologic oncology.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 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.
- Readability and Understandability of Spanish Language Urogynecology Questionnaires.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Training a Bilingual Artificial Intelligence Model on Pediatric Orthopaedic Resources to Enhance the Readability of Patient Education Materials.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Over half of Spanish-speaking patients use the internet to understand their diagnosis. We evaluated readability of Spanish online patient education materials (OPEMs) about gynecologic cancer to assess compliance with National Institute of Health (NIH) recommendations to be at or below eighth grade reading level. Methods: We conducted an online search using six Spanish gynecologic cancer terms on three major search engines with cookies and location disabled. The first five results by cancer type were included. Readability was analyzed by Spanish Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) and Gilliam-Peña-Mountain (GPM) indices. One-way ANOVA with Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) post-hoc analysis was performed. Results: 322 unique OPEMs were retrieved using Spanish queries. This included 132 (41 %) from non-profit organizations, 114 (35.4 %) from governmental organizations, and 63 (19.5 %) from academic medical centers; the remainder were from professional medical society or pharmaceutical company sources. Overall, gynecologic oncology OPEMs were written at a mean 9.8 ± 1.2 grade reading level. Only 14 % of OPEMs were written at or below an eighth grade reading level. There were significant differences in readability by publishing source (p < 0.001). Though there were no significant differences in readability by cancer type (p = 0.07), the mean reading level for all cancer types was between ninth and eleventh grade level. Conclusions: 86% of readily searchable Spanish gynecologic oncology OPEMs are written above recommended reading levels. Gynecologic oncologists should curate and support Spanish-speaking patients in finding high-quality online educational content.
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.