ArticleThe journal of spinal cord medicine2025
Readability assessment of patient education materials on autonomic dysreflexia.
Article in The journal of spinal cord medicine, 2025. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextAutonomic dysreflexia (AD), a lethal condition of which patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) are at risk, is under-identified in these patient populations. Research literature is limited on AD-related educational resources provided to patients with SCI.
objectiveThe American Medical Association and National Institutes of Health recommend healthcare material be written in a sixth- to eighth-grade reading level for patients. In this study, the authors compared the readability of AD-related materials provided to patients with SCI through Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF)-accredited websites versus those obtained via Google search.
methodsOnline, free materials were obtained from CARF-accredited institutions. These data were compared with top Google search results for the term "autonomic dysreflexia." Materials were assessed using 4 different validated readability scales. The average reading grade level was recorded for each readability index between the two groups.
resultsFor CARF-accredited institutions (
conclusionOnline information provided to patients with SCI on AD through CARF-accredited institutions is two- to four-reading grade levels higher than recommended. Efforts should be made to modify the readability of CARF-accredited and non-academic website materials to improve patient education.
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.