Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Zenker’s Diverticulum: Readability and Quality of Online Written Education Materials

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Dysphagia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To assess the readability and quality of online materials for Zenker’s diverticulum. A Google search of “Zenker’s diverticulum” was performed and the first 50 websites were reviewed. Readability was measured by Flesch Reading Ease (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) scores using an online calculator. Understandability and actionability were assessed with the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Printed Materials (PEMAT-P). Websites were categorized as either patient-targeted or physician-targeted and unpaired t tests were used to compare scores between these two groups. A total of 31 websites (23 patient-oriented sites and 8 physician-oriented sites) were analyzed. The average FRES, FKGL, and SMOG scores were 29.96 ± 14.72, 13.75 ± 2.78, and 12.19 ± 2.02, respectively, for the entire cohort. Readability scores for the patient-oriented sites were better than the physician-oriented sites for each measure (FRES 36.21 ± 8.86 vs 11.96 ± 13.54, FKGL 12.68 ± 1.58 vs 16.85 ± 3.25, and SMOG 11.37 ± 1.26 vs 14.53 ± 1.98; p < 0.001 for all comparisons). PEMAT-P understandability and actionability scores for the entire cohort were 68.20% ± 10.19% and 10.75% ± 16.52% respectively, and did not differ between patient-oriented and physician oriented sites. Though patient-oriented sites had better readability than physician-oriented sites for Zenker’s Diverticulum, both categories had readability levels more advanced than what is recommended for medical education materials.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References:

  1. Weiss B. Health literacy: a manual for clinicians. Chic Am Med Assoc Found Am Med Assoc 2007.

  2. Gaines T, Malik RD. Readability of pelvic floor dysfunction questionnaires. Neurourol Urodyn. 2020;39:813–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Alwani MM, Campiti VJ, Bandali EH, Nesemeier BR, Ting JY, Shipchandler TZ. Evaluation of the quality of printed online education materials in cosmetic facial plastic surgery. Facial Plast Surg Aesthetic Med. 2020;22:255–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Arslan D, Sami Tutar M, Kozanhan B, Bagci Z. The quality, understandability, readability, and popularity of online educational materials for heart murmur. Cardiol Young. 2020;30:328–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wong K, Levi JR. Readability trends of online information by the american academy of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery foundation. Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg Off J Am Acad Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg. 2017;156:96–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. O’Connell Ferster AP, Hu A. Evaluating the quality and readability of Internet information sources regarding the treatment of swallowing disorders. Ear Nose Throat J. 2017;96:128–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yi GS, Hu A. Quality and readability of online information on in-office vocal fold injections. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2020;129:294–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schwarzbach HL, Mady LJ, Kaffenberger TM, Duvvuri U, Jabbour N. Quality and readability assessment of websites on human papillomavirus and oropharyngeal cancer. Laryngoscope. 2021;131:87–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bizzotto A, Iacopini F, Landi R, Costamagna G. Zenker’s diverticulum: exploring treatment options. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital Organo Uff Della Soc Ital Otorinolaringol E Chir Cerv-facc. 2013;33:219–29.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Davies D. “The 7 Most Popular Search Engines in the World - SEO 101.” [Internet]. Search Engine Journal; 2018 [cited 2021 Jan 20]. Available from: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/seo-101/meet-search-engines/.

  11. Alwani MM, Campa KA, Svenstrup TJ, Bandali EH, Anthony BP. An Appraisal of Printed Online Education Materials on Spasmodic Dysphonia. J Voice [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Dec 31]; Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0892199719304497.

  12. Ting K, Hu A. Evaluating the quality and readability of thyroplasty information on the Internet. J Voice Off J Voice Found. 2014;28:378–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Balakrishnan V, Chandy Z, Hseih A, Bui T-L, Verma SP. Readability and understandability of online vocal cord paralysis materials. Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg Off J Am Acad Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg. 2016;154:460–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa E-R. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA. 2002;287:2691–700.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Readability Formulas [Internet]. Available from: https://readabilityformulas.com/flesch-grade-level-readability-formula.php.

  16. Flesch-Kincaid Readability tests [Internet]. Wikipedia. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flesch%E2%80%93Kincaid_readability_tests.

  17. Shoemaker SJ, Wolf MS, Brach C. Development of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT): a new measure of understandability and actionability for print and audiovisual patient information. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;96:395–403.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Health on the Net [Internet]. Available from: https://www.hon.ch/en/.

  19. Fox S, Duggan M. Health Online 2013 [Internet]. Pew Research Center; [cited 2021 Jan 20]. Available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2013/01/15/health-online-2013/.

  20. Steehler KR, Steehler MK, Pierce ML, Harley EH. Social media’s role in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery: informing clinicians, empowering patients. Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg Off J Am Acad Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg. 2013;149:521–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wong K, Gilad A, Cohen MB, Kirke DN, Jalisi SM. Patient education materials assessment tool for laryngectomy health information. Head Neck. 2017;39:2256–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Powell LE, Andersen ES, Pozez AL. Assessing readability of patient education materials on breast reconstruction by major US academic hospitals as compared with nonacademic sites. Ann Plast Surg. 2020;86:610–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sharma AN, Martin B, Shive M, Zachary CB. The readability of online patient information about laser resurfacing therapy. Dermatol Online J. 2020. https://doi.org/10.5070/D3264048343.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Weiss KD, Vargas CR, Ho OA, Chuang DJ, Weiss J, Lee BT. Readability analysis of online resources related to lung cancer. J Surg Res. 2016;206:90–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Siddiqui E, Shah AM, Sambol J, Waller AH. Readability assessment of online patient education materials on atrial fibrillation. Cureus. 2020;12:e10397.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Chen LW, Harris VC, Jia JL, Xie DX, Tufano RP, Russell JO. Search trends and quality of online resources regarding thyroidectomy. Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg Off J Am Acad Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg. 2020;165:50–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Barbarite E, Shaye D, Oyer S, Lee LN. Quality assessment of online patient information for cosmetic botulinum toxin. Aesthet Surg J. 2020;40:NP636–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee SE, Brown WC, Gelpi MW, Kimple AJ, Senior BA, Zanation AM, et al. Understood? Evaluating the readability and understandability of intranasal corticosteroid delivery instructions. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2020;10:773–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors did not receive any financial support for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Matthew Shneyderman

  2. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Ruth Davis MD, Grace Snow MD, Shumon Dhar MD & Lee M. Akst MD

Authors
  1. Matthew Shneyderman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ruth Davis MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Grace Snow MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shumon Dhar MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lee M. Akst MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ruth Davis MD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shneyderman, M., Davis, R., Snow, G. et al. Zenker’s Diverticulum: Readability and Quality of Online Written Education Materials. Dysphagia 37, 1461–1467 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-022-10406-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-022-10406-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation