Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40583070›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2025

A retrospective multi-institutional assessment of breast radiology and pathology report readability and a novel patient tool (MedEd) utilizing American literacy standards.

Samantha Greenseid, Gande Li, Olivia Mihulka, Arianna Vazquez, Alex Verosky, Salvador Rodriguez Franco, Samhita Bheemireddy, Madeline G Higgins, Sarah Leslie, Sarah Tevis and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Samantha GreenseidDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA. sag447@med.miami.edu.
Gande LiDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Olivia MihulkaUniversity of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA.
Arianna VazquezUniversity of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA.
Alex VeroskyGeneral Surgery Residency, Sky Ridge Medical Center, Lone Tree, CO, USA.
Salvador Rodriguez FrancoDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Samhita BheemireddyAlbany Medical Center, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA.
Madeline G HigginsDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Sarah LeslieDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Sarah TevisDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Kristin RojasDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth literacy is a critical factor in patient engagement and outcomes during cancer survivorship. With the 21st Century Cures Act, patients now receive immediate access to radiology and pathology reports, yet these documents often exceed the 6th-grade reading level recommended by the American Medical Association. While prior studies have examined general breast cancer materials, the readability of individualized clinical reports remains unexplored.

methodsIn this multi-institutional retrospective study, 120 de-identified breast radiology and pathology reports from the University of Colorado and the University of Miami were analyzed across six report types. Readability was assessed using six validated indices. Additionally, 98 MedEd definitions and 96 MedEd-directed online patient education materials (OPEMs) were evaluated. MedEd is a Chrome plug-in designed to highlight key breast health terms and provide physician-curated definitions with links to vetted educational content.

resultsAcross institutions, most clinical reports exceeded a high school reading level, with surgical pathology reports being the least accessible. MedEd definitions and OPEMs demonstrated better readability but still surpassed the recommended 6th-grade level.

conclusionsBreast cancer-related reports and educational materials remain difficult for many survivors to comprehend. Improved design of patient-facing tools-potentially through AI integration and patient co-development-may enhance accessibility, empowerment, and shared decision-making. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: This study underscores a critical gap between the readability of breast radiology and pathology reports and the literacy levels of many cancer survivors. As patients gain immediate access to these documents through electronic portals, the complexity of medical language can lead to confusion, anxiety, and disengagement from care. Survivors may be particularly vulnerable during post-treatment surveillance when understanding follow-up imaging and pathology is vital for shared decision-making. Tools like MedEd-while promising-must continue to evolve to meet national literacy standards. Simplifying medical reports and integrating patient-centered, Al-supported education tools can enhance survivors' comprehension, foster autonomy, and ultimately improve their confidence and outcomes throughout survivorship.

Indexed as

Breast cancerMedEd patient education toolPathologyRadiology reportsReadability

Identifiers

PMID40583070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.