ArticleTrauma surgery & acute care open2025
Content assessment and readability of online injury prevention resources on firearm safety: a cross-sectional analysis of hospital and national injury prevention literature.
Article in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Language of prevention: advancing firearm safety through health literacy.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2025Article
- Readability is responsibility: ensuring firearm safety educational materials are on target.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2025Article
- Design for innovation: centering the patient voice in the development of trauma clinical guidance.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Firearm-related injuries are a preventable public health epidemic and the leading cause of pediatric death in America. Online injury prevention resources (OIPRs) offer potential for educating the public on firearm safety. National public health organizations recommend a sixth-grade reading level for these resources. We hypothesize that OIPRs for firearm safety may not meet this standard and are inconsistent in content. Methods: We analyzed firearm injury OIPRs from three sources: verified trauma centers (TCs), national health organizations, and gun violence prevention advocacy groups. We assessed readability using reading time, Flesch-Kincaid grade level, and Flesch reading ease. We also assessed whether OIPRs included child safety, safe handling, and safe storage of firearms. Results: Among 587 TCs, 105 had publicly accessible OIPRs. After removing duplicates, we analyzed 53 unique hospital OIPRs, 25 from national organizations, and 8 from advocacy groups. The mean reading time of hospital-based OIPRs was 2 min and 49 s, and 5 min and 30 s for advocacy organizations. The average Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level for hospital OIPRs was 8.2, national organizations 8.4, and advocacy groups 9.7. Only 21% of hospital and 22% of national OIPRs met the sixth-grade level; none of the advocacy groups met this standard. 79% of hospital-based OIPRs content related to child safety, compared with 44% of national organizations and none of the advocacy groups. Only 21% of TCs and no advocacy groups provided information on safe handling practices. Conclusion: Few OIPRs meet recommended readability guidelines and often fail to address key topics such as child safety or safe handling of firearms. This gap in accessible educational information highlights the need for standardized resources to reduce firearm injury. Future research should aim to improve these resources to ensure usability and effective outreach to our communities.
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.