Search

Examines the effect of active, passive and nominal styles of writing on the readability of science research. Recommendation of the author of an active style of writing; Prevalence of the use of active voice in reporting by journalists; Preference of scientists to use nominal style; Criteria of reader response to the styles.

Sociologists have often been criticized for their inability to make themselves understood. Talcott Parsons, in particular, has been singled out for his alleged incomprehensibility. As a consequence, his name has achieved legendary stature for more than his theoretical contributions. The present inquiry exa- mines Parsons' writing style using the Gunning fog index of readability, finding that Parsons was indeed unintelligible as a writer. Moreover, it was discovered, serendipitously, that a postive feedback loop was operating (i.e., with one exception, Parsons became more unintelligible with each new book). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A literary criticism of the book "Sartor Resartus," by Thomas Carlyle is presented. It outlines the characters and explores their symbolic significance. It examines the strangeness of the subject and the figurative rhetoric, the disjointed structure and the action of the text upon the readers that is at times seen as unethical and underhanded. An overview of the story is also given.

The article presents the author's response to J. Michael Sproule's commentaries to her review in Sproule's textbook "Argument: Language & Its Influence." The author states that reviewers evaluate textbooks using objective criteria such as content. She notes that she is convinced to Sproule's responses and believes that the subject matter of the argument is distinctive. She adds that her major arguments regarding the incomplete analysis of the book to traditional concepts remain unchanged.

Apps that enable contact-tracing are instrumental in mitigating the transmission of COVID-19, but there have been concerns among users about the data collected by these apps and their management. Contact tracing is of paramount importance when dealing with a pandemic, as it allows for rapid identification of cases based on the information collected from infected individuals about other individuals they may have had recent contact with. Advances in digital technology have enabled devices such as mobile phones to be used in the contract-tracing process. However, there is a potential risk of users' personal information and sensitive data being stolen should hackers be in the near vicinity of these devices. Thus, there is a need to develop privacy-preserving apps. Meanwhile, privacy policies that outline the risk associated with the use of contact-tracing apps are needed, in formats that are easily readable and comprehensible by the public. To our knowledge, no previous study has examined the readability of privacy policies of contact-tracings apps. Therefore, we performed a readability analysis to evaluate the comprehensibility of privacy policies of 7 contact-tracing apps currently in use. The contents of the privacy policies of these apps were assessed for readability using Readability Test Tool, a free web-based reliability calculator, which computes scores based on a number of statistics (ie, word count and the number of complex words) and indices (ie, Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level, Gunning Fog Index, and Simplified Measure of Gobbledygook index). Our analysis revealed that explanations used in the privacy policies of these apps require a reading grade between 7 and 14, which is considerably higher than the reading ability of the average individual. We believe that improving the readability of privacy policies of apps could be potentially reassuring for users and may help facilitate the increased use of such apps. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses how to achieve good practice of writing. It states that good practice does not necessarily mean a formal set of rules on the writing process. It mentions the importance of focusing always on the readers, and of making clear texts. It adds that regulatory documents, usually, which contain over a few tables with a Table of Tables (ToT).

Background: Three main changes were implemented in the Australian National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) in December 2017: an increase in the recommended age to start screening, extended screening intervals, and change from the Papanicolaou (Pap) test to primary human papillomavirus screening (cervical screening test). The internet is a readily accessible source of information to explain the reasons for these changes to the public. It is important that web-based health information about changes to national screening programs is accessible and understandable for the general population.Objective: This study aimed to evaluate Australian web-based resources that provide information about the changes to the cervical screening program.Methods: The term cervical screening was searched in 3 search engines. The first 10 relevant results across the first 3 pages of each search engine were selected. Overall, 2 authors independently evaluated each website for readability (Flesch Reading Ease [FRE], Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook [SMOG] index), quality of information (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool [PEMAT] for printable materials), credibility (Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA] benchmark criteria and presence of Health on the Net Foundation code of conduct [HONcode] certification), website design, and usability with 5 simulation questions to assess the relevance of information. A descriptive analysis was conducted for the readability measures, PEMAT, and the JAMA benchmark criteria.Results: Of the 49 websites identified in the search, 15 were eligible for inclusion. The consumer-focused websites were classed as fairly difficult to read (mean FRE score 51.8, SD 13.3). The highest FRE score (easiest to read) was 70.4 (Cancer Council Australia Cervical Screening Consumer Site), and the lowest FRE score (most difficult to read) was 33.0 (NCSP Clinical Guidelines). A total of 9 consumer-focused websites and 4 health care provider-focused websites met the recommended threshold (sixth to eighth grade; SMOG index) for readability. The mean PEMAT understandability scores were 87.7% (SD 6.0%) for consumer-focused websites and 64.9% (SD 13.8%) for health care provider-focused websites. The mean actionability scores were 58.1% (SD 19.1%) for consumer-focused websites and 36.7% (SD 11.0%) for health care provider-focused websites. Moreover, 9 consumer-focused and 3 health care provider-focused websites scored above 70% for understandability, and 2 consumer-focused websites had an actionability score above 70%. A total of 3 websites met all 4 of the JAMA benchmark criteria, and 2 websites displayed the HONcode.Conclusions: It is important for women to have access to information that is at an appropriate reading level to better understand the implications of the changes to the cervical screening program. These findings can help health care providers direct their patients toward websites that provide information on cervical screening that is written at accessible reading levels and has high understandability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The language gap between health consumers and health professionals has been long recognized as the main hindrance to effective health information comprehension. Although providing health information access in consumer health language (CHL) is widely accepted as the solution to the problem, health consumers are found to have varying health language preferences and proficiencies. To simplify health documents for heterogeneous consumer groups, it is important to quantify how CHLs are different in terms of complexity among various consumer groups.Objective: This study aimed to propose an informatics framework (consumer health language complexity [CHELC]) to assess the complexity differences of CHL using syntax-level, text-level, term-level, and semantic-level complexity metrics. Specifically, we identified 8 language complexity metrics validated in previous literature and combined them into a 4-faceted framework. Through a rank-based algorithm, we developed unifying scores (CHELC scores [CHELCS]) to quantify syntax-level, text-level, term-level, semantic-level, and overall CHL complexity. We applied CHELCS to compare posts of each individual on online health forums designed for (1) the general public, (2) deaf and hearing-impaired people, and (3) people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).Methods: We examined posts with more than 4 sentences of each user from 3 health forums to understand CHL complexity differences among these groups: 12,560 posts from 3756 users in Yahoo! Answers, 25,545 posts from 1623 users in AllDeaf, and 26,484 posts from 2751 users in Wrong Planet. We calculated CHELCS for each user and compared the scores of 3 user groups (ie, deaf and hearing-impaired people, people with ASD, and the public) through 2-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests and analysis of covariance tests.Results: The results suggest that users in the public forum used more complex CHL, particularly more diverse semantics and more complex health terms compared with users in the ASD and deaf and hearing-impaired user forums. However, between the latter 2 groups, people with ASD used more complex words, and deaf and hearing-impaired users used more complex syntax.Conclusions: Our results show that the users in 3 online forums had significantly different CHL complexities in different facets. The proposed framework and detailed measurements help to quantify these CHL complexity differences comprehensively. The results emphasize the importance of tailoring health-related content for different consumer groups with varying CHL complexities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article emphasizes young adult literature books' readability for all ages. The author says that these books include"Angus," "Thongs," "Full-Frontal Snogging," "Freak the Mighty," "Tangerine," and "The Giver." She considers these books to be of high interest to all people, whether children or adult, because they offer situations and ideas that rarely come in full view. They are also effective in rediscovering the pleasure of reading within an individual. Most specially, he adds that these books are ideal for those looking for pure nostalgia as well as an effective provider of valuable glimpse into the teenage mind.

The article presents a study which examines the responses of readers in all types of critical writing. The study made use of polar adjective pairs, potency and activity factors, and Bales' leadership variables to measure the meaniing of a critical review to an individual reader. The result of the study shows that the three leading stylistic effects factors include social evaluative affect on the reader, readability, and readers' estimate of critic/art interaction.

The article offers suggestions to pharmacists regarding selecting, applying, and interpreting readability formulas. It states that medication information can be routinely communicated on the Internet regardless of veracity and readability, which underscore the importance of the pharmacist's role, and mentions that pharmacists should disclose the text sample size, text location within the document. It notes availability of guidelines Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common cause of disability in people older than 65 years. Readability of online OA information has never been assessed. A 2003 study found the quality of online OA information to be poor. Objective: The aim of this study was to review the readability and quality of current online information regarding OA. Methods: The term osteoarthritis was searched across the three most popular English language search engines. The first 25 pages from each search engine were analyzed. Duplicate pages, websites featuring paid advertisements, inaccessible pages (behind a pay wall, not available for geographical reasons), and nontext pages were excluded. Readability was measured using Flesch Reading Ease Score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and Gunning-Fog Index. Website quality was scored using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria and the DISCERN criteria. Presence or absence of the Health On the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode) certification, age of content, content producer, and author characteristics were noted. Results: A total of 37 unique websites were found suitable for analysis. Readability varied by assessment tool from 8th to 12th grade level. This compares with the recommended 7th to 8th grade level. Of the 37, 1 (2.7%) website met all 4 JAMA criteria. Mean DISCERN quality of information for OA websites was "fair," compared with the "poor" grading of a 2003 study. HONcode-endorsed websites (43%, 16/37) were of a statistically significant higher quality. Conclusions: Readability of online health information for OA was either equal to or more difficult than the recommended level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ASCs can ensure best practices in the informed consent process through knowing state laws and ensuring patients fully understand the procedure, along with its risks and expected outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Date Presented 4/20/2018 Vulnerable populations are at risk for low health literacy and are more susceptible to poor health outcomes. Findings indicate that occupational therapy patient education materials aimed at these populations were difficult to read and understand. The profession should lead efforts to provide quality education materials. Primary Author and Speaker: Mary Dumas Additional Authors and Speakers: Vanessa Carmody, Johanna Black, Michael Blake [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses the article about how biomedical research writing has became more difficult to read and understand.

Background: Online health forums are widely used, but the quality of advice differs as much as the knowledge backgrounds of the audience members who receive the advice. It is important to understand how people judge the information given online. In line with the communication accommodation theory (CAT), online forums represent specific social contexts of communication which can present either accommodative or nonaccommodative language to an audience. Accordingly, use of accommodative or nonaccommodative language might affect people's perceived trust in the communicator.Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate how experts who use accommodative (vs nonaccommodative) language are evaluated by passive users of an online forum.Methods: Participants (n=98) took part in an online experiment and read experts' posts about 10 nutrition myths. Following a 2 x 2 mixed design, experts' posts were written using either low or high amounts of medical technical jargon (MTJ) (within factor) and were directed at different audiences (mainly other medical experts [in a professional forum] vs a user group mainly comprising laypersons [in an advisory forum]) (between factor). Accommodation occurred where experts used high amounts of MTJ to address other medical experts in the professional forum; it also occurred when experts used low amounts of MTJ to address laypersons in the advisory forum. Conversely, nonaccommodation occurred when experts used high amounts of MTJ in the advisory forum and low amounts of MTJ in the professional forum. In each condition, participants evaluated the credibility of the information, the trustworthiness of the experts, and the accommodation by the experts.Results: Overall, participants judged the credibility of information to be higher when experts used MTJ that was accommodative to the designated audience, F1,95=3.10, P=.04, ηp2=.031. In addition, participants judged the experts in professional forums to be more trustworthy than experts in advisory forums (all F1,96≥3.54, P ≤.03, ηp2≥.036). Moreover, participants rated experts who used high amounts of MTJ to have higher competence (F1,96=37.54, P<.001, ηp2=.28], lower integrity (F1,96=10.77, P=.001, ηp2=.101), and lower benevolence (F1,96=9.75, P=.002, ηp2=.092), as well as to have lower perceived accommodation to the audience (all F1,96≥72.17, P<.001, ηp2≥.43) compared with experts who used low MTJ.Conclusions: To provide health information online that is perceived as credible, experts should consider using similar language as the language used by the addressed audience. As it is often impossible to determine the exact makeup of an online audience, further research might investigate whether having experts explicitly declare which audience they intend to address can help people to more reliably assess an expert's trustworthiness. Furthermore, as people assess information differently depending on the context of online communication, it would be valuable for research to consider other aspects of the context beyond those of the audience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Access to information is critical to a patient's valid exercise of autonomy. One increasingly important source of medical information is the Internet. Individuals often turn to drug company ("pharma") websites to look for drug information.Objective: The objective of this study was to determine whether there is information on pharma websites that is embargoed: Is there information that is hidden from the patient unless she attests to being a health care provider? We discuss the implications of our findings for health care ethics.Methods: We reviewed a convenience sample of 40 pharma websites for "professionals-only" areas and determined whether access to those areas was restricted, requiring attestation that the user is a health care professional in the United States.Results: Of the 40 websites reviewed, 38 had information that was labeled for health care professionals-only. Of these, 24 required the user to certify their status as a health care provider before they were able to access this "hidden" information.Conclusions: Many pharma websites include information in a "professionals-only" section. Of these, the majority require attestation that the user is a health care professional before they can access the information. This leaves patients with two bad choices: (1) not accessing the information or (2) lying about being a health care professional. Both of these outcomes are unacceptable. In the first instance, the patient's access to information is limited, potentially impairing their health and their ability to make reasonable and well-informed decisions. In the second instance, they may be induced to lie in a medical setting. "Teaching" patients to lie may have adverse consequences for the provider-patient relationship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The demand for health information online is increasing rapidly without clear governance.Objective: We aim to evaluate the credibility, quality, readability, and accuracy of online patient information concerning endometriosis.Study Design: We searched 5 popular Internet search engines: aol.com, ask.com, bing.com, google.com, and yahoo.com. We developed a search strategy in consultation with patients with endometriosis, to identify relevant World Wide Web pages. Pages containing information related to endometriosis for women with endometriosis or the public were eligible. Two independent authors screened the search results. World Wide Web pages were evaluated using validated instruments across 3 of the 4 following domains: (1) credibility (White Paper instrument; range 0-10); (2) quality (DISCERN instrument; range 0-85); and (3) readability (Flesch-Kincaid instrument; range 0-100); and (4) accuracy (assessed by a prioritized criteria developed in consultation with health care professionals, researchers, and women with endometriosis based on the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology guidelines [range 0-30]). We summarized these data in diagrams, tables, and narratively.Results: We identified 750 World Wide Web pages, of which 54 were included. Over a third of Web pages did not attribute authorship and almost half the included pages did not report the sources of information or academic references. No World Wide Web page provided information assessed as being written in plain English. A minority of web pages were assessed as high quality. A single World Wide Web page provided accurate information: evidentlycochrane.net. Available information was, in general, skewed toward the diagnosis of endometriosis. There were 16 credible World Wide Web pages, however the content limitations were infrequently discussed. No World Wide Web page scored highly across all 4 domains.Conclusion: In the unlikely event that a World Wide Web page reports high-quality, accurate, and credible health information it is typically challenging for a lay audience to comprehend. Health care professionals, and the wider community, should inform women with endometriosis of the risk of outdated, inaccurate, or even dangerous information online. The implementation of an information standard will incentivize providers of online information to establish and adhere to codes of conduct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Electronic health records (EHRs) are a rich resource for developing applications to engage patients and foster patient activation, thus holding a strong potential to enhance patient-centered care. Studies have shown that providing patients with access to their own EHR notes may improve the understanding of their own clinical conditions and treatments, leading to improved health care outcomes. However, the highly technical language in EHR notes impedes patients' comprehension. Numerous studies have evaluated the difficulty of health-related text using readability formulas such as Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Gunning-Fog Index (GFI). They conclude that the materials are often written at a grade level higher than common recommendations.Objective: The objective of our study was to explore the relationship between the aforementioned readability formulas and the laypeople's perceived difficulty on 2 genres of text: general health information and EHR notes. We also validated the formulas' appropriateness and generalizability on predicting difficulty levels of highly complex technical documents.Methods: We collected 140 Wikipedia articles on diabetes and 242 EHR notes with diabetes International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code. We recruited 15 Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT) users to rate difficulty levels of the documents. Correlations between laypeople's perceived difficulty levels and readability formula scores were measured, and their difference was tested. We also compared word usage and the impact of medical concepts of the 2 genres of text.Results: The distributions of both readability formulas' scores (P<.001) and laypeople's perceptions (P=.002) on the 2 genres were different. Correlations of readability predictions and laypeople's perceptions were weak. Furthermore, despite being graded at similar levels, documents of different genres were still perceived with different difficulty (P<.001). Word usage in the 2 related genres still differed significantly (P<.001).Conclusions: Our findings suggested that the readability formulas' predictions did not align with perceived difficulty in either text genre. The widely used readability formulas were highly correlated with each other but did not show adequate correlation with readers' perceived difficulty. Therefore, they were not appropriate to assess the readability of EHR notes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Web-based surveys are increasingly used to capture data essential for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention research. However, there are challenges in ensuring the informed consent of Web-based research participants.Objective: The aim of our study was to develop and assess the efficacy of alternative methods of administering informed consent in Web-based HIV research with men who have sex with men (MSM).Methods: From July to September 2014, paid advertisements on Facebook were used to recruit adult MSM living in the United States for a Web-based survey about risk and preventive behaviors. Participants were randomized to one of the 4 methods of delivering informed consent: a professionally produced video, a study staff-produced video, a frequently asked questions (FAQs) text page, and a standard informed consent text page. Following the behavior survey, participants answered 15 questions about comprehension of consent information. Correct responses to each question were given a score of 1, for a total possible scale score of 15. General linear regression and post-hoc Tukey comparisons were used to assess difference (P<.001) in mean consent comprehension scores. A mediation analysis was used to examine the relationship between time spent on consent page and consent comprehension.Results: Of the 665 MSM participants who completed the comprehension questions, 24.2% (161/665) received the standard consent, 27.1% (180/665) received the FAQ consent, 26.8% (178/665) received the professional consent video, and 22.0% (146/665) received the staff video. The overall average consent comprehension score was 6.28 (SD=2.89). The average consent comprehension score differed significantly across consent type (P<.001), age (P=.04), race or ethnicity (P<.001), and highest level of education (P=.001). Compared with those who received the standard consent, comprehension was significantly higher for participants who received the professional video consent (score increase=1.79; 95% CI 1.02-2.55) and participants who received the staff video consent (score increase=1.79; 95% CI 0.99-2.59). There was no significant difference in comprehension for those who received the FAQ consent. Participants spent more time on the 2 video consents (staff video median time=117 seconds; professional video median time=115 seconds) than the FAQ (median=21 seconds) and standard consents (median=37 seconds). Mediation analysis showed that though time spent on the consent page was partially responsible for some of the differences in comprehension, the direct effects of the professional video (score increase=0.93; 95% CI 0.39-1.48) and the staff-produced video (score increase=0.99; 95% CI 0.42-1.56) were still significant.Conclusions: Video-based consent methods improve consent comprehension of MSM participating in a Web-based HIV behavioral survey. This effect may be partially mediated through increased time spent reviewing the consent material; however, the video consent may still be superior to standard consent in improving participant comprehension of key study facts.Trail Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02139566; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02139566 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6oRnL261N). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers suggestions in presenting email addresses for personal names and designations. It explains that presenting addresses is a personal preference but stresses the importance of readability and memorability. It adds that maintaining one or two addresses ensures easy access and larger storage.

In his commentary on our previously published article "Readability of Self-Report Measures of Depression and Anxiety," J. Sehinka (2012) argued for the importance of considering readability of patient materials and highlighted limitations of existing methodologies for this assessment. Schinka's commentary articulately described the weaknesses of readability assessment and emphasized the importance of the development of improved strategies for assessing readability to maximize the validity of self-report measures in applied settings. In our reply, we support and extend Schinka's argument, highlighting the importance of consideration of the range of factors (e.g., use of reverse-scored items) that may increase respondent difficulty with comprehension. Consideration of the readabifity of self-report symptom measures is critical to the validity of these measures in both clinical practice and research settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laypeople frequently discuss medical research findings on Web-based platforms, but little is known about whether they grasp the tentativeness that is inherent in these findings. Potential influential factors involved in understanding medical tentativeness have hardly been assessed to date.Objective: The research presented here aimed to examine the effects of personality factors and of other users' previous contributions in a Web-based forum on laypeople's understanding of the tentativeness of medical research findings, using the example of research on deep brain stimulation.Methods: We presented 70 university students with an online news article that reported findings on applying deep brain stimulation as a novel therapeutic method for depression, which participants were unfamiliar with. In a randomized controlled experiment, we manipulated the forum such that the article was either accompanied by user comments that addressed the issue of tentativeness, by comments that did not address this issue, or the article was accompanied by no comments at all. Participants were instructed to write their own individual user comments. Their scientific literacy, epistemological beliefs, and academic self-efficacy were measured. The outcomes measured were perceived tentativeness and tentativeness addressed in the participants' own comments.Results: More sophisticated epistemological beliefs enhanced the perception of tentativeness (standardized β=.26, P=.034). Greater scientific literacy (stand. β=.25, P=.025) and greater academic self-efficacy (stand. β=.31, P=.007) were both predictors of a more extensive discussion of tentativeness in participants' comments. When forum posts presented in the experiment addressed the issue of tentativeness, participants' subsequent behavior tended to be consistent with what they had read in the forum, F2,63=3.66; P=.049, ηp(2)=.092.Conclusions: Students' understanding of the tentativeness of research findings on deep brain stimulation in an online forum is influenced by a number of character traits and by the previous comments that were contributed to the forum by other users. There is potential for targeted modification of traits such as scientific literacy, epistemological beliefs, and academic self-efficacy to foster critical thinking in laypeople who take part in online discussions of medical research findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The abstract should summarize the content of the paper. Try to keep the abstract below 200 words. Do not make references nor display equations in the abstract. The journal will be printed by photo-offset from the same-sized copy prepared by you. Your manuscript should be printed on A4 paper (21.0 cm x 29.7 cm). It is imperative that the margins and style described below be adhered to carefully. This will enable us to keep uniformity in the final printed copies of the Journal. Please keep in mind that the manuscript you prepare will be photographed and printed as it is received. Readability of copy is of paramount importance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses aspects of the Common Rule for the research that involves the use of humans or specimens. It highlights the proposed changes to the rule to pertain direct patient care services for collecting human specimens or data. It also cites the importance of medical information related to human specimens to enhance patient care services.

The article discusses the relevance of research in creative writing. It states that research is very important in the writing process because it helps students improve their skills and their range of rhetoric knowledge and choices. Moreover, the article believes that research gives imaginative writers the ability to talk with some sense of authority and experience by establishing authenticity in setting, character, action, voice and tone. Lastly, it suggests that teachers should discuss research methods and writing strategies in their classrooms.

Background: Wikis may give clinician communities the opportunity to build knowledge relevant to their practice. The only previous study reviewing a set of health-related wikis, without specification of purpose or audience, globally showed a poor reliability. Objective: Our aim was to review medical wiki websites dedicated to clinical practices. Methods: We used Google in ten languages, PubMed, Embase, Lilacs, and Web of Science to identify websites. The review included wiki sites, accessible and operating, having a topic relevant for clinical medicine, targeting physicians or medical students. Wikis were described according to their purposes, platform, management, information framework, contributions, content, and activity. Purposes were classified as "encyclopedic" or "non-encyclopedic". The information framework quality was assessed based on the Health On the Net (HONcode) principles for collaborative websites, with additional criteria related to users' transparency and editorial policy. From a sample of five articles per wikis, we assessed the readability using the Flesch test and compared articles according to the wikis' main purpose. Annual editorial activities were estimated using the Google engine. Results: Among 25 wikis included, 11 aimed at building an encyclopedia, five a textbook, three lessons, two oncology protocols, one a single article, and three at reporting clinical cases. Sixteen wikis were specialized with specific themes or disciplines. Fifteen wikis were using MediaWiki software as-is, three were hosted by online wiki farms, and seven were purpose-built. Except for one MediaWiki-based site, only purpose-built platforms managed detailed user disclosures. The owners were ten organizations, six individuals, four private companies, two universities, two scientific societies, and one unknown. Among 21 open communities, 10 required users' credentials to give editing rights. The median information framework quality score was 6 out of 16 (range 0-15). Beyond this score, only one wiki had standardized peer-reviews. Physicians contributed to 22 wikis, medical learners to nine, and lay persons to four. Among 116 sampled articles, those from encyclopedic wikis had more videos, pictures, and external resources, whereas others had more posology details and better readability. The median creation year was 2007 (1997-2011), the median number of content pages was 620.5 (3-98,039), the median of revisions per article was 17.7 (3.6-180.5) and 0.015 of talk pages per article (0-0.42). Five wikis were particularly active, whereas six were declining. Two wikis have been discontinued after the completion of the study. Conclusions: The 25 medical wikis we studied present various limitations in their format, management, and collaborative features. Professional medical wikis may be improved by using clinical cases, developing more detailed transparency and editorial policies, and involving postgraduate and continuing medical education learners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers the author's insights on the engagement of community and family in literacy learning process. Topics discussed by the author include ideas to develop concept in the learning process which include the 100 story building project to develop writing ability of a child, the literacy buddies program, and the Ballarat imagination library which is a program that provides free books to children from zero to five years of age.

Describes how to simplify the reading ease formula developed by Rudolph Flesch. Advantages over the Cloze procedure and the Dale-Chall readability formula; Suggestion that counting the words and excess syllables in each sentence will yield the number of sentences without additional reference to the document.

The article offers information on expletive construction as pedagogical dilemma in the professional writing classroom. Expletives develop impersonality and accordingly broaden the gap between writer and reader and establish a sham eloquence when overused. Furthermore, expletives typically reverse the subject-verb syntax patterns that characterize standard utilization. Readability studies show that the inversions created by expletives baffle the rapid comprehensibility needed in professional writing.

An abstract of the article "Content Validity of the Patient-Report Hamilton Inventory for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome," by Tara L. Packham and Joy MacDermid is presented.

The article focuses on the facet of report writing-communication which is the readability of psychological reports. The conclusions and recommendations section of 70 psychological reports were evaluated by means of the Dale-Chall readability. Significantly, the average educational level of personnel in each of the groups was determined while the analysis of variance was computed on the readability scores of the groups. Furthermore, a mean readability score and standard deviation for the entire group was also obtained. Finally, most of the reports tended to be within the assumed reading level of the individual for whom the report is written.

This section discusses the findings of the analysis made by the department of technical journalism of Iowa State College, of approximately 50 separate prison publications in 1953, giving suggestions to inmate editors relative to their magazines. The survey covers the same prison publications as reported in The Prison World in 1950, with four exceptions. The Cactus Blossom and the Rahway Dome are no longer printed. The Forum and The Student failed to supply current issues for examination. The 1953 analysis centers around two areas--readability and human interest in prison publications. Reading ease was measured by length of sentences and length of words. In order to obtain some basis of comparison, the readability and human interest of the April issue, 1953, of the Reader's Digest was used. The results of the scores show that 11 of the 13 prison publications were more difficult and 2 easier to read than the Reader's Digest. In terms of human interest, three prison publications ranked higher than the Reader's Digest and 10 below. Of the 13 publications, The Clock ranked first in readability and the Menard Times the lowest. Although the readability and human interest ratings of the 13 publications do not cover all the prison magazines published in the U.S., the scoring does give a general idea of what makes a good publication and what does not.

The author reflects on the result of the journal's readership survey in the U.S. He cites the survey of the 598 members of the American Academy of Audiology and indicates that the journal fared well in both absolute performance and other professional publications. The author also recognizes the importance of the survey since it provides opportunities for the journal to further improve its performance and readership.