Shieh Carol, Hosei Barbara
Department of Environments for Health, Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
J Community Health Nurs. 2008 Apr-Jun;25(2):73-90. doi: 10.1080/07370010802017083.
This study examined readability and suitability of printed health information materials colleted from multiple sources. In phase I, nursing students used Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG; McLaughlin, 1969) to assess the readability of 21 materials collected from the community. In phases II and III, nursing students and registered nurses used SMOG and the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM; Doak, Doak, & Root, 1996) to evaluate 15 prenatal materials from a Healthy Start program. SMOG assigns a reading grade level based on the number of words with 3 or more syllables. SAM has 22 items in 6 evaluation areas: content, literacy demand, graphics, layout and typography, learning stimulation and motivation, and cultural appropriateness. Major findings included that 53% to 86% of the printed materials had a reading level at or higher than 9th grade; materials lacked summary, interaction, and modeled behaviors, and registered nurses rated more materials as not suitable and fewer as superior for suitability qualities than students. Improving printed materials to have lower reading levels and better suitability qualities are indicated.
本研究考察了从多个来源收集的印刷版健康信息材料的可读性和适用性。在第一阶段,护理专业学生使用简化的晦涩语言测量法(SMOG;麦克劳克林,1969年)评估从社区收集的21份材料的可读性。在第二和第三阶段,护理专业学生和注册护士使用SMOG和材料适用性评估法(SAM;多克、多克和鲁特,1996年)评估来自“健康起步”项目的15份产前材料。SMOG根据三音节及以上单词的数量确定阅读年级水平。SAM在6个评估领域有22个项目:内容、读写要求、图表、布局与排版、学习激励以及文化适宜性。主要研究结果包括,53%至86%的印刷材料的阅读水平达到或高于九年级;材料缺乏总结、互动和示范行为,并且注册护士认为不适用的材料比学生认为不适用的更多,而在适用性质量方面评为优秀的材料比学生认为优秀的更少。研究表明需要改进印刷材料,使其具有较低的阅读水平和更好的适用性质量。