Search

Recently, the readability of texts has become the focus of reading research because it is believed to have implications for reading comprehension, which is of utmost importance in the field of English as a foreign language (EFL), particularly in the teaching, learning and assessment of reading comprehension. Unfortunately, the influence of text readability on reading comprehension (and reading time) has not been well studied in the EFL context. Most text readability studies are conducted in medical contexts, but these studies are often limited in predicting readability scores for sample texts. To address this gap, the current study aimed to evaluate the influence of text readability levels (based on the Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL)) on students' reading comprehension and reading time. Data were collected through reading test and analyzed using SPSS version 22. The Friedman test revealed that the distribution of students' reading comprehension score (X2=197.532, p=0.000) and reading time (X2=215.323, p=0.000) are different in each text, suggesting that the readability of texts has a significant influence on both. This study contributed to the practices of reading instruction and assessment. Limitations and suggestions for further research are briefly discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Owner comprehension is vital to recruitment and study success, but limited information exists regarding the readability of public‐facing veterinary clinical trial descriptions. Objectives The current study sought to evaluate the readability of public‐facing online veterinary clinical trial descriptions from academic institutions and private referral practices. Animals None. Methods This prospective study assessed readability in a convenience sample of veterinary clinical trial study descriptions using 3 common methods: the Flesch‐Kincaid Grade Level (F‐K), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), and online Automatic Readability Checker (ARC). Results were compared across specialties and between academic and private institutions. Results Grade level and readability consensus scores (RCSs) were obtained for 61 online clinical trial descriptions at universities (n = 49) and private practices (n = 12). Average grade‐level RCS for study descriptions was 14.13 (range, 9‐21). Using Microsoft Word, the FRES score was higher in descriptions from universities compared to private practices (P = .03), and F‐K scores were lower in university compared to private practice descriptions (P = .03). FRES (P = .07), F‐K (P = .12), and readability consensus (P = .17) scores obtained from ARC were not different between institution types. Forty‐eight studies (79%) had RCSs over 12, equivalent to reading material at college or graduate school levels. Conclusions and Clinical Importance Similar to other areas in veterinary communication, the evaluated veterinary clinical trial descriptions used for advertising and recruitment far exceeded the recommended 6th‐grade reading level for medical information. Readability assessments are straightforward to conduct, and ensuring health literacy should be a customary best practice in veterinary medicine and clinical research.

Background: Owner comprehension is vital to recruitment and study success, but limited information exists regarding the readability of public‐facing veterinary clinical trial descriptions. Objectives: The current study sought to evaluate the readability of public‐facing online veterinary clinical trial descriptions from academic institutions and private referral practices. Animals: None. Methods: This prospective study assessed readability in a convenience sample of veterinary clinical trial study descriptions using 3 common methods: the Flesch‐Kincaid Grade Level (F‐K), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), and online Automatic Readability Checker (ARC). Results were compared across specialties and between academic and private institutions. Results: Grade level and readability consensus scores (RCSs) were obtained for 61 online clinical trial descriptions at universities (n = 49) and private practices (n = 12). Average grade‐level RCS for study descriptions was 14.13 (range, 9‐21). Using Microsoft Word, the FRES score was higher in descriptions from universities compared to private practices (P =.03), and F‐K scores were lower in university compared to private practice descriptions (P =.03). FRES (P =.07), F‐K (P =.12), and readability consensus (P =.17) scores obtained from ARC were not different between institution types. Forty‐eight studies (79%) had RCSs over 12, equivalent to reading material at college or graduate school levels. Conclusions and Clinical Importance: Similar to other areas in veterinary communication, the evaluated veterinary clinical trial descriptions used for advertising and recruitment far exceeded the recommended 6th‐grade reading level for medical information. Readability assessments are straightforward to conduct, and ensuring health literacy should be a customary best practice in veterinary medicine and clinical research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The field of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) has gained considerable attention, mainly due to the growing importance of English teaching and the need for preparing international professionals. The primary academic emphasis of this field is largely centered on the study of English for Academic Purposes (EAP). It has become increasingly important for China to provide EAP education to its vast population of college students, who represent a significant proportion of global tertiary-level English learners. By doing so, they can improve their academic literacy and participate more effectively in international academic communication. In 2016, China's College English Test Examination Board issued the National College English Test Syllabus which emphasized the importance of academic English literacy in the test design. This syllabus was released during a contentious debate among Chinese academics about the role of EAP in college English teaching and testing. Despite this heated discussion, there are currently few studies that have analyzed the linguistic nature of academic English tests in a quantitative manner. This paper calculates the academic word coverage of the reading passages in two crucial English proficiency tests designed for college students in China, the College English Test (CET) and the Test of English for Academic Purposes (TEAP). It is found that the academic word coverage of CET is increasing from the year 2013 to 2021 and that the academic word coverage of TEAP is slightly higher than that of CET. In this sense, these English tests can meet the requirements for measuring Chinese college students' academic literacy. It is also found that there is a positive correlation between academic word coverage and language difficulty as is indicated by Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. These findings provide an empirical reference for the study of academic English tests in China, and other parts of the world, and contribute to EAP teaching and testing reform for the development of students' academic literacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Websites have become a primary way for patients to access health-related information, which allows patients to not only understand their condition better but also to engage in better decision making with their health care provider. However, this can be a double-edged sword, as information patients access may not be of high quality, easily readable, or could be biased based on website authorship. This study examines the readability and content quality of common websites about shoulder pain, with a specific focus on biomedical vs. psychosocial information. The Flesch reading-ease score (FRES) and Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL) instruments were used to assess website readability. Health on the net code of conduct (HONcode) certification and the DISCERN tool were used to evaluate the reliability and quality of information. Lastly, shoulder-specific content quality and focus was gauged using a Shoulder-specific Website Appraisal Tool (SWAT) created for this study. A systematic search protocol was used to identify popular shoulder injury websites. The websites were identified using 5 search terms (shoulder pain , shoulder muscle pain , shoulder impingement , shoulder rotator cuff pain , and shoulder pain diagnosis) across 5 English-speaking regions (United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand) using the Google search engine. The top 10 websites for each term and region combination were included and combined, yielding 41 original websites for appraisal; several (6) websites were omitted as duplicates, behind paywalls, or nontext (video) for a total of 35 websites appraised. On average, the FRES shoulder pain websites readability was 55.37, which is categorized as "fairly difficult" to read, and a seventh- or eighth-grade reading level based on the FKGL. For trustworthiness and bias, 57% (20 of 35) of the websites were HONcode certified. The quality of health care information using the DISCERN score averaged 50.92%. Examining shoulder-specific content quality, the average SWAT score was 10.54 out of 14 possible points, with only 1 website reporting information on psychosocial aspects of shoulder pain. This study suggests that shoulder pain websites present information that is at too high of a reading level for public consumption, has a strong bias toward biomedical causes of shoulder pain, and would benefit from implementation of website screening tools to improve evidence-based content. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine readability, understandability, and actionability of online health information related to transgender voice care. Study Design: Review of online materials. Setting: Academic medical center. Methods: A Google search of "transgender voice care" was performed with the first 50 websites meeting inclusion criteria included. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), and the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG). Understandability and actionability were measured by 2 independent reviewers using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Printable Materials (PEMAT-P). Unpaired t tests were used to compare clinician- and patient-oriented sites, surgical and nonsurgical sites, and sites that discuss nonbinary indications for voice care. Analysis of variance was used to compare sites that discuss voice feminization, masculinization, both, or neither. Results: Average scores across the cohort for FRES, FKGL, and SMOG were 43.77 ± 13.52, 12.14 ± 2.66, and 11.30 ± 1.93, respectively, indicating materials were above a 12th-grade reading level. PEMAT-P scores for understandability and actionability were 64.95% ± 15.78% and 40.55% ± 23.86%, respectively. Patient-oriented sites were significantly more understandable and actionable than clinician-oriented sites (P <.02). Websites that discussed only voice feminization were significantly more readable according to objective metrics (FKGL, SMOG) than websites that discussed both feminization and masculinization or those that did not differentiate care types (P <.05). Conclusion: Online information written about transgender voice care is written at a level above what is recommended for patient education materials. Providers may improve accessibility of transgender voice care by enhancing readability of online materials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Selection of a textbook for an introductory investment course can be challenging. Many criteria may be considered in such decisions, including a textbook's pedagogical approach, end-of-chapter material, and instructor supplements. Faculty may also wish to consider a text's readability, or the qualities of writing which are related to reader comprehension. Using the Flesch-Kincaid readability index, this study analyzes the predicted readability of five popular introductory investment textbooks. T-tests are performed to determine whether significant differences exist between the textbooks. Our results indicate that the Jordan/Miller/Dolvin textbook is the most readable while the Jones/Jensen textbook is the least readable among our sample. These findings can be useful to adopters and editors of introductory investment textbooks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Patients increasingly rely on online resources for medical information; however, the Internet is unregulated and prone to misinformation. This study analyzes the reliability, quality, and readability of websites for Ménière's disease.Study Design: A Google search was performed using keywords Ménière's disease. The first 5 pages (50 results) were reviewed. Websites were sorted into 5 categories: academic institutions, government agencies, professional organizations, medical information websites, and miscellaneous. The reliability, quality, and readability of each website were evaluated using the DISCERN instrument and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL). DISCERN assesses reliability and quality by scoring 15 questions on a scale from 1 (low) to 3 (high). The reliability score emphasizes clear objectives and sources, as well as lack of bias, whereas the quality score emphasizes information on treatment options. The FKGL of each website was calculated using a formula to determine the equivalent US grade reading level.Setting: Ambulatory.Subjects: None.Results: Forty-two websites were analyzed. Academic institutions were the most common (n = 13, 31%) but scored the lowest using DISCERN at 1.75 ± 0.13. Medical information websites scored highest at 2.24 ± 0.09 (P = .024 compared to academic institutions). The average FKGL of all websites was 10.12 ± 0.57 with medical information websites being the easiest to read at 8.84 ± 0.83. Only 5 (13%) of websites scored below the eighth-grade reading level.Conclusions: Most top online search results for Ménière's disease are deficient in quality and readability. Medical information websites are generally the most reliable and easy to read. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: "Readability" of consent forms is vital to the informed consent process. The average human hospital consent form is written at a 10th grade reading level, whereas the average American adult reads at an 8th grade level. Limited information currently exists regarding the readability of veterinary general medical or clinical research consent forms. Hypothesis/Objectives: The goal of this study was to assess the readability of veterinary clinical trial consent forms from a group of veterinary referral centers recently involved in a working group focused on veterinary clinical trial review and consent. We hypothesized that consent forms would not be optimized for client comprehension and would be written above the National Institutes of Health‐recommended 6th grade reading level. Animals: None. Methods: This was a prospective study assessing a convenience sample of veterinary clinical trial consent forms. Readability was assessed using 3 methods: the Flesch‐Kincaid (F‐K) Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), and the Readability Test Tool (RTT). Results were reported as mean (±SD) and compared across specialties. Results: Fifty‐three consent forms were evaluated. Mean FRES was 37.5 ± 6.0 (target 60 or higher). Mean F‐K Grade Level was 13.0 ± 1.2 and mean RTT grade level was 12.75 ± 1.1 (target 6.0 or lower). There was substantial agreement between F‐K and RTT grade level scores (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.8). Conclusions and Clinical Importance: No form evaluated met current health literacy recommendations for readability. A simple and readily available F‐K Microsoft‐based approach for evaluating grade level was in substantial agreement with other methods, suggesting that this approach might be sufficient for use by clinicians and administrators drafting forms for future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, we sought to analyze the readability of online patient education materials (PEMs) related to juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM). We analyzed the top 100 Google results and using six different readability scores, found 53 PEMs which had an average grade reading level of 17.4 (graduate level). PEMs by health care providers were written at higher grade levels than those by non‐health care providers. Our findings demonstrate a clear need for online JDM PEMs that are written at an appropriate reading level and can be comprehended by patients and families of all levels of health literacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The research compared and contrasted hand-scoring and computerized methods of evaluating the grade level of patient education materials that are distributed at an academic medical center in east Tennessee and sought to determine if these materials adhered to the American Medical Association’s (AMA’s) recommended reading level of sixth grade. Methods: Librarians at an academic medical center located in the heart of Appalachian Tennessee initiated the assessment of 150 of the most used printed patient education materials. Based on the Flesch-Kincaid (F-K) scoring rubric, 2 of the 150 documents were excluded from statistical comparisons due to the absence of text (images only). Researchers assessed the remaining 148 documents using the hand-scored Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) method and the computerized F-K grade level method. For SMOG, 3 independent reviewers hand-scored each of the 150 documents. For F-K, documents were analyzed using Microsoft Word. Reading grade levels scores were entered into a database for statistical analysis. Inter-rater reliability was calculated using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC). Paired t-tests were used to compare readability means. Results: Acceptable inter-rater reliability was found for SMOG (ICC=0.95). For the 148 documents assessed, SMOG produced a significantly higher mean reading grade level (M=9.6, SD=1.3) than F-K (M=6.5, SD=1.3; p

Objective Previous studies have shown that patient education materials published by the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation may be too difficult for the average reader to understand. The purpose of this study was to determine if current educational materials show improvements in readability. Study Design Cross-sectional analysis. Setting The Patient Health Information section of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation website. Subjects and Methods All patient education articles were extracted in plain text. Webpage navigation, references, author information, appointment information, acknowledgments, and disclaimers were removed. Follow-up editing was also performed to remove paragraph breaks, colons, semicolons, numbers, percentages, and bullets. Readability grade was calculated with the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease, Gunning-Fog Index, Coleman-Liau Index, Automated Readability Index, and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook. Intra- and interobserver reliability were assessed. Results A total of 126 articles from 7 topics were analyzed. Readability levels across all 6 tools showed that the difficulty of patient education materials exceeded the abilities of an average American. As compared with previous studies, current educational materials by the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation have shown a decrease in difficulty. Intra- and interobserver reliability were both excellent, with intraclass coefficients of 0.99 and 0.96, respectively. Conclusion Improvements in readability is an encouraging finding and one that is consistent with recent trends toward improved health literacy. Nevertheless, online patient educational material is still too difficult for the average reader. Revisions may be necessary for current materials to benefit a larger readership. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The field of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) has gained considerable attention, mainly due to the growing importance of English teaching and the need for preparing international professionals. The primary academic emphasis of this field is largely centered on the study of English for Academic Purposes (EAP). It has become increasingly important for China to provide EAP education to its vast population of college students, who represent a significant proportion of global tertiary-level English learners. By doing so, they can improve their academic literacy and participate more effectively in international academic communication. In 2016, China's College English Test Examination Board issued the National College English Test Syllabus which emphasized the importance of academic English literacy in the test design. This syllabus was released during a contentious debate among Chinese academics about the role of EAP in college English teaching and testing. Despite this heated discussion, there are currently few studies that have analyzed the linguistic nature of academic English tests in a quantitative manner. This paper calculates the academic word coverage of the reading passages in two crucial English proficiency tests designed for college students in China, the College English Test (CET) and the Test of English for Academic Purposes (TEAP). It is found that the academic word coverage of CET is increasing from the year 2013 to 2021 and that the academic word coverage of TEAP is slightly higher than that of CET. In this sense, these English tests can meet the requirements for measuring Chinese college students' academic literacy. It is also found that there is a positive correlation between academic word coverage and language difficulty as is indicated by Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. These findings provide an empirical reference for the study of academic English tests in China, and other parts of the world, and contribute to EAP teaching and testing reform for the development of students' academic literacy., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Liu, Shi, Qiu, Shi, Hao, Zhu, Yan and Li.)

It is important that patient-facing clinical trial information is easily understood by potential trial participants, active trial participants, family members, friends and carers. The readability of a document refers to its typographic and linguistic characteristics that allow the text to be read and comprehended and it is recommended that healthcare providers aim that all information disseminated to the lay public be at a suitable readability level. Whilst there are established readability calculators for literature, there is no standard for health information. Several readability calculators are available that aid in the analysis of a text, URL or website's readability, however, to date there has been no head-to-head comparison of these. Five readability calculators were compared, including four online realtime calculators, (i) Readable (www.readable.com), (ii) www.webfx.com , (iii) www.datayze.com and (iv) www.online-utility.org , as well as the PC-based analyzer Microsoft Word (Microsoft Corp., USA). Three categories of text information were analysed, including (i) childrens' fairy tales (n = 20) (ii) scientific reports (n = 20) from BBC News websites and (iii) scientific abstracts (n = 20). This study demonstrated that varying scores were obtained by using different readability calculators. Based on these data in combination with issues including availability and ease-of-use, we advocate the use of Readable or Microsoft Word software to aid in the preparation of patient-facing clinical trial information. Clinical trial networks should now consider the need for standardisation of readability calculators and provide guidance to stakeholders so that readability of materials may be improved in a standardised and uniform manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate dental patient education brochures produced since 2000 to determine if there is any change in the Flesch-Kincaid grade level readability. Methods: A convenience sample of 36 brochures was obtained for analysis of the readability of the patient education material on multiple dental topics. Readability was measured using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level through Microsoft Word. Pearson's correlation was used to describe the relationship among the factors of interest. Backward model selection of multiple linear regression model was used to investigate the relationship between Flesch-Kincaid Grade level and a set of predictors included in this study. Results: A convenience sample (n=36) of dental education brochures produced from 2000 to 2014 showed a mean Flesch-Kincaid reading grade level of 9.15. Weak to moderate correlations existed between word count and grade level (r=0.40) and characters count and grade level (r=0.46); strong correlations were found between grade level and average words per sentence (r=0.70), average characters per word (r=0.85) and Flesch Reading Ease (r=-0.98). Only 1 brochure out of the sample met the recommended sixth grade reading level (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level 5.7). Overall, the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of all brochures was significantly higher than the recommended sixth grade reading level (p<0.0001). Conclusion: The findings from this study demonstrated that there has generally been an improvement in the Flesch-Kincaid grade level readability of the brochures. However, the majority of the brochures analyzed are still testing above the recommended sixth grade reading level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study concerning the grade level of online patient education materials (PEMs) on parathyroid surgery. The researchers identified 30 web-based articles that tackled parathyroid surgery and found that the online PEMs were written above the recommended sixth-grade reading level. They also believed that the improvement in the readability of PEM could likely play a role in the promotion of better health education and compliance.

Rationale and Objectives The US Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS) recommends that Internet-based patient education materials (IPEMs) be written below the sixth-grade reading level to target the average American adult. This study was designed to determine the readability of IPEMs regarding mammography for breast cancer screening. Materials and Methods Three-hundred mammography-related Web sites were reviewed for IPEMs. Forty-two IPEMs that met the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct were assessed for readability level with four readability indices that use existing algorithms based on word and sentence length to quantitatively analyze Internet sources for language intricacy including the following: Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook (Gunning FOG; GFOG). Results were compared to national recommendations, and intergroup analysis was performed. Results No IPEMs (0%) regarding mammography were written at or below the sixth-grade reading level, based on FKGL. The mean readability scores were as follows: FRES, 49.04 ± 10.62; FKGL, 10.71 ± 2.01; SMOG, 13.33 ± 1.67; and Gunning FOG, 14.32 ± 2.18. These scores indicate that the readability of mammography IPEMs is written at a “difficult” level, significantly above the recommended sixth-grade reading level ( P < .05) determined by the USDHHS. Conclusions IPEMs related to mammography are written well above the recommended sixth-grade level and likely reflect other IPEMs in diagnostic radiology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

DNA evidence can be extremely compelling. With ongoing scientific advances and applications of DNA evidence in the criminal justice system, it is increasingly important that police, lawyers, and judges recognise both the limitations of DNA evidence and the strength of the evidence in particular cases. Because most forensic sciences are formally communicated via expert reports, we analysed the readability of 68 such reports of DNA evidence from 6 of 8 Australian jurisdictions. We conducted content analyses using three categories: content and sequence, language, and format. Categories contained qualitative and quantitative items drawn from theory and past research. Report styles differed by jurisdiction and by main audience - police and the courts. Reports for police were brief and few links were made between sections in these reports. Reports for courts were less brief and used either legal or scientific styles. Common sections in reports for courts included: the scientist's specialised knowledge; laboratory accreditation information; item list; results; and notes on interpretation. Sections were often not in a logical sequence, due to the use of appendices. According to Flesch Reading Ease scores, reports for police had language that was fairly difficult, and reports for courts, difficult. Difficulty was compounded by the use of specialist terms. Reports for police and the appendices of reports for court often used very small font and single line spacing. Many reports for court contained tables that spanned several pages. Suggestions based on theory and past research are provided to assist scientists to enhance the readability of reports for non-scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific language contains features that may impede understanding for non-scientists. Forensic scientists'written reports are read by police, lawyers, and judges, and thus assessment of readability is warranted. Past studies of readability differed in background theory and approach, but analysed one or more of: content and sequence; language; and format. Using a holistic approach, we assessed the readability of expert reports (n = 78) of forensic glass comparison from 7 Australian jurisdictions. Two main audiences for reports were relevant: police and the courts. Reports for police were presented either as a completed form or as a brief legal-style report. Reports for court were less brief and used either legal or scientific styles, with content and formatting features supporting these distinctions. Some jurisdictions prepared a single report to satisfy both the courts and police. In general, item list, analytical techniques, results, notes on interpretation, and conclusions were included in reports of all types. However, some reports omitted analytical techniques, and results and conclusions were sometimes combined. According to Flesch Reading Ease, language was difficult, with a Flesch-Kincaid grade level of university undergraduate. Sentences were long and contained undefined specialist terms. Information content per clause (lexical density), was typically high, as for other scientific texts. Uncertainty was expressed differently by jurisdiction. Reports from most jurisdictions were cluttered in appearance, with single-line spacing, narrow margins, and gridlines in tables. Simple suggestions, based on theory and past research, are provided to assist scientists to enhance the readability of expert reports for non-scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientists have an ethical responsibility to assist non-scientists to understand their findings and expert opinions before they are used as decision-aids within the criminal justice system. The communication of scientific expert opinion to non-scientist audiences (e.g., police, lawyers, and judges) through expert reports is an important but under-researched issue. Readability statistics were used to assess 111 conclusions from a proficiency test in forensic glass analysis. The conclusions were written using an average of 23 words per sentence, and approximately half of the conclusions were expressed using the active voice. At an average Flesch-Kincaid Grade level of university undergraduate (Grade 13), and Flesch Reading Ease score of difficult (42), the conclusions were written at a level suitable for people with some tertiary education in science, suggesting that the intended non-scientist readers would find them difficult to read. To further analyse the readability of conclusions, descriptive features of text were used: text structure; sentence structure; vocabulary; elaboration; and coherence and unity. Descriptive analysis supported the finding that texts were written at a level difficult for non-scientists to read. Specific aspects of conclusions that may pose difficulties for non-scientists were located. Suggestions are included to assist scientists to write conclusions with increased readability for non-scientist readers, while retaining scientific integrity. In the next stage of research, the readability of expert reports in their entirety is to be explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health literacy impacts health outcomes. Health literacy is a measure of a person's competence to find, access, contextualize, and understand the information needed to make health decisions. Low levels of health literacy have been associated with poor health status. Health literacy can be enhanced by improving the readability of health literature. Misuse and abuse of prescription medicines and controlled substances is rising. It could be argued that improving the readability of the drug-information documents associated with these medicines could serve to alleviate this situation in a small, albeit incremental, manner. This paper provides a readability assessment of 71 such documents. Methods: The readability of drug-information documents associated with 12 commonly misused and abused painkiller medicines and controlled substances published by the top six US pharmacies was assessed. The Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease, and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) indices were used to assess the readability of these drug-information documents. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the readability of the documents. Results: The average Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level index score was found to be 11.16. The average Flesch Reading Ease index score was found to be 45.94. The average SMOG index score was found to be 13.60. Pharmacies C and E had the best average readability scores, whereas pharmacies A and B had the worst average readability scores. Conclusion: Access, contents, and formatting of the documents were qualitatively analyzed to make recommendations to improve readability. Pharmacies C and E were used as benchmarks to identify the seven best practices. Good drug-information documents should have: (1) clear purpose, (2) limited scope, (3) summary/brief review, (4) well-placed graphics, (5) informative illustrations, (6) clean layout and lucid formatting relevant to the media, and (7) focus on the intended users. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on assessment of readability of otolaryngology related Internet-based patient education material (IPEM) from otolaryngology associations in the U.S. It mentions the use of analysis of variance and post hoc Turkey's honestly significant difference (HSD) analysis to identify if IPEM adopt recommended reading level of American Medical Association (AMA) and National Institutes of Health (NIH). It concludes that IPEM were found out to exceed the recommended reading level.

Objectives/Hypothesis: Numerous professional societies, clinical practices, and hospitals provide Internet-based patient education materials (PEMs) to the general public, but not all of this information is written at a reading level appropriate for the average patient. The National Institutes of Health and the US Department of Health and Human Services recommend that PEMs be written at or below the sixth-grade level. Our purpose was to assess the readability of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS)-related PEMs available on the Internet and compare readability levels of PEMs provided by three sources: professional societies, clinical practices, and hospitals. Study Design: A descriptive and correlational design was used for this study. Methods: The readability of 31 ESS-related PEMs was assessed with four different readability indices: Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook (Gunning FOG). Averages were evaluated against national recommendations and between each source using analysis of variance and t tests. Results: The majority of PEMs (96.8%) were written above the recommended sixth-grade reading level, based on FKGL ( P < .001). Only one article (3.2%) had an FKGL at or below the sixth-grade level. The mean readability values were: FRES 47.1 ± 13.4, FKGL 10.7 ± 2.4, SMOG 13.7 ± 1.6, and Gunning FOG 12.4 ± 2.7. Conclusions: Current Internet-based PEMs related to ESS, regardless of source type, were written well above the recommended sixth-grade level. Materials from the hospitals/university-affiliated websites had lower readability scores, but were still above recommended levels. Web-based PEMs pertaining to ESS should be written with the average patient in mind. Laryngoscope, 2012 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess readability and understandability of online materials for vocal cord leukoplakia., Study Design: Review of online materials., Setting: Academic medical center., Methods: A Google search of "vocal cord leukoplakia" was performed, and the first 50 websites were considered for analysis. Readability was measured by the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG). Understandability and actionability were assessed by 2 independent reviewers with the PEMAT-P (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Printable Materials). Unpaired t tests compared scores between sites aimed at physicians and those at patients, and a Cohen's kappa was calculated to measure interrater reliability., Results: Twenty-two websites (17 patient oriented, 5 physician oriented) met inclusion criteria. For the entire cohort, FRES, FKGL, and SMOG scores (mean ± SD) were 36.90 ± 20.65, 12.96 ± 3.28, and 15.65 ± 3.57, respectively, indicating that materials were difficult to read at a >12th-grade level. PEMAT-P understandability and actionability scores were 73.65% ± 7.05% and 13.63% ± 22.47%. Statistically, patient-oriented sites were more easily read than physician-oriented sites ( P < .02 for each of the FRES, FKGL, and SMOG comparisons); there were no differences in understandability or actionability scores between these categories of sites., Conclusion: Online materials for vocal cord leukoplakia are written at a level more advanced than what is recommended for patient education materials. Awareness of the current ways that these online materials are failing our patients may lead to improved education materials in the future., (© The Authors 2021.)

Background: We assessed the health literacy of trauma discharge summaries and hypothesize that they are written at higher-than-recommended grade levels., Methods: The Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL) and Flesch reading ease scores (FRES), 2 universally accepted scales for evaluating readability of medical information, were used., Results: A total of 497 patients were included. The mean patient age was 56 ± 22 years. Average FKGL and FRES were 10 ± 1 and 44 ± 7, including 132 summaries classified as very or fairly difficult to read. A total of 204 (65%) patients had functional reading skills at grade levels below the FKGL of their dismissal note; only 74 patients (24%) had the reading skills to adequately comprehend their dismissal summary. Total 30-day readmissions were 40, 65% of whom were patients with inadequate literacy for dismissal summary comprehension., Conclusions: Patient discharge notes are written at too advanced of an educational level. To ensure patient comprehension, dismissal notes should be rewritten to a 6th-grade level., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: A person's health literacy is one of the most important indicators of a patient's health status. According to national recommendations, patient education materials should be written at no higher than the sixth- to eighth-grade reading level. The purpose of our study was to assess the readability of online patient education materials related to orthopaedic oncology on the websites of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), American Cancer Society (ACS), Bone and Cancer Foundation (BCF), and National Cancer Institute (NCI)., Methods: We searched the online patient education libraries of the AAOS, ACS, BCF, and NCI for all articles related to orthopaedic oncology. The Flesch-Kincaid (FK) readability score was calculated for each article and compared between sources., Results: A total of 227 articles were identified with an overall mean FK grade level of 9.8. Stratified by source, the mean FK grade levels were 10.1, 9.6, 11.1, and 9.5 for the AAOS, ACS, BCF, and NCI, respectively (P < 0.003). Only 31 articles (14%) and 1 article (0.4%) were at or below the recommended eighth- and sixth-grade levels, respectively., Discussion: Online patient education materials related to orthopaedic oncology appear to be written at a level above the comprehension ability of the average patient., (Copyright 2015 by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.)

Objective: Most professional organizations now provide patient information material, and not all of this material is appropriate for the average American adult to comprehend. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the United States Department of Health and Human Services recommend that patient education materials be written at the sixth-grade level. Our aim was to assess the readability of neurosurgery-related patient education material and compare it with The American Medical Association, NIH, and United States Department of Health and Human Services recommendations., Methods: Materials provided by the American Association of Neurologic Surgeons (AANS) and the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM) and National Institutes of Health were assessed with the Flesch-Kincaid grade level and Flesch Reading Ease score with Microsoft Office Word software., Results: None of the articles had Flesch-Kincaid grade levels at or below the sixth-grade level. All articles on the AANS Conditions and Treatments section were written at or above the ninth-grade level; three of the AANS Camera-Ready Fact Sheets and four of the NIH/NLM articles were written between the seventh- and eighth-grade levels., Conclusions: Current patient education material provided by the AANS is written well above the recommended level. Material from the NLM and NIH performed better, but was still above the recommended sixth-grade level. Education materials should contain information relevant to patients' conditions, be accurate in the information they present, and be written with the average patient in mind., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)