ArticleCureus2026
Online Patient Education Materials for Pediatric Septic Arthritis Exceed Recommended Reading Levels: A Readability Analysis.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPediatric septic arthritis is a time-sensitive orthopedic emergency requiring prompt recognition and treatment to avoid serious morbidity. Families often seek information online, yet prior studies show patient education materials (PEMs) in orthopedics frequently exceed recommended readability standards (≤6th-grade level). PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate the readability of online PEMs on pediatric septic arthritis from top-ranked US pediatric orthopedic hospitals and assess alignment with readability guidelines.
methodsIn July 2025, websites of the top 25 US pediatric orthopedic hospitals were searched for PEMs on "septic arthritis" in children. Hospitals were included if they hosted a dedicated PEM ≥100 words. Text was extracted, cleaned of non-narrative elements, and analyzed with eight readability metrics: Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog Index, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Coleman-Liau Index, Automated Readability Index (ARI), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Ford, Caylor, Sticht (FORCAST) formula, and Dale-Chall Readability Score. Descriptive statistics were summarized, and FKGL was correlated with hospital rank using Spearman's test.
resultsOf 25 hospitals, 12 (48%) hosted qualifying PEMs. The mean readability was grade 10.6, above the recommended sixth-grade level; none achieved ≤6. Seven institutional PEMs were written at an average reading level significantly above the eighth-grade reading level (p < 0.01). Five PEMs (41.7%) were written at or below the eighth-grade level, largely from identical third-party content. Mean FRES was 51, reflecting "somewhat challenging" readability. Higher-ranked hospitals trended toward worse FKGL scores, but correlation was nonsignificant (ρ = -0.32; p = 0.31).
conclusionsNearly half of the top hospitals lacked PEMs on pediatric septic arthritis, and available content largely exceeded recommended readability. Adoption of plain-language guidelines, external audits, or artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted editing may enhance accessibility and equity.
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.