Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A quantitative readability analysis of patient education resources from gastroenterology society websites

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background and aims

The lay public frequently access and rely on online information as a source of their medical knowledge. Many medical societies are unaware of national patient education material guidelines and subsequently fail to meet them. The goal of the present study was to evaluate the readability of patient education materials within the medical field of gastroenterology.

Methods

Two hundred fourteen articles pertaining to patient education materials were evaluated with ten well-established readability scales. The articles were available on the websites for the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), and the NIH section National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s honest significant difference (HSD) post hoc analysis were conducted to determine any differences in level of readability between websites.

Results

The 214 articles were written at an 11.8 ± 2.1 grade level with a range of 8.0 to 16.0 grade level. A one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD post hoc analysis determined the ACG was written at a significantly (p < 0.05) more difficult level when compared to the AGA, the BSG, and the NIDDK websites. No differences were noted when comparing the ASGE website.

Conclusions

None of the patient education materials were written at a level that met national guidelines. If the materials are redrafted, the general American public will likely have a greater understanding of the gastroenterology content.

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

Fig. 1

References

  1. Internet & American Life Project (2011) Demographics of internet users. Pew Research Center, Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Diaz JAGR, Ng JJ, Reinert SE, Friedmann PD, Moulton AW (2002) Patients’ use of the internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med 17:180–185

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. National Institutes of Health (2012) How to write easy to read health materials. National Library of Medicine Website. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/etr.html. Accessed 4 Jan 2012

  4. Weis BD (2003) Health literacy: a manual for clinicians. Chicago, American Medical Association, American Medical Foundation

    Google Scholar 

  5. US Department of Health and Human Services-Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2009) Simply put—a guide for creating easy-to-undestand materials, 3 edn. US Department of Health and Human Services-Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hansberry DR, Agarwal N, Gonzales SF, Baker SR (2014) Are we effectively informing patients? A quantitative analysis of online patient education resources from the American Society of Neuroradiology. Am J Neuroradiol 35(7):1270–1275. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3854

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Agarwal N, Feghhi DP, Gupta R, Hansberry DR, Heary RF, Goldstein IM (2014) A comparative analysis of minimally invasive and open spine surgery patient education resources. J Neurosurg Spine 21(3):468–474

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Eloy JA, Li S, Kasabwala K, Agarwal N, Hansberry DR, Baredes S et al (2012) Readability assessment of patient education materials on major otolaryngology association websites. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 147(3):466–471. doi:10.1177/0194599812456152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Agarwal N, Hansberry DR, Sabourin V, Tomei KL, Prestigiacomo CJ (2013) A comparative analysis of the quality of patient education materials from medical specialties. JAMA Intern Med 8(173):1257–1259. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.6060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ryan C, Bauman K (2016) Educational attainment in the United States: 2015. United States Census Bureau. http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2016/demo/p20-578.pdf

  11. Berkman ND, DeWalt, D.A., Pignone, M.P., Sheridan, S.L., Lohr, K.N., Lux, L., Sutton, S.F., Swinson, T., Bonito, A.J. Literacy and health outcomes. Evidence report/technology assessment no. 87 (Prepared by RTI International—University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290–02-0016). 2004(AHRQ Publication No. 04-E007-2. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality)

  12. National Center for Education Statistics (2006) The health literacy of America’s adults: results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. United States Department of Education https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/2006483.pdf

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals, 132 South 10th Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA

    David R. Hansberry

  2. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hahnemann University Hospital, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Sahil R. Patel

  3. Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Prateek Agarwal

  4. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Nitin Agarwal

  5. Department of Medicine, Rutgers University, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA

    Elizabeth S. John

  6. Department of Medicine, Rutgers University, New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA

    Ann M. John

  7. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    James C. Reynolds

Authors
  1. David R. Hansberry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sahil R. Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Prateek Agarwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nitin Agarwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Elizabeth S. John
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ann M. John
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. James C. Reynolds
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David R. Hansberry.

Ethics declarations

Funding statement

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hansberry, D.R., Patel, S.R., Agarwal, P. et al. A quantitative readability analysis of patient education resources from gastroenterology society websites. Int J Colorectal Dis 32, 917–920 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-016-2730-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-016-2730-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation