Sander U, Kolb B, Christoph C, Emmert M
Abteilung Information und Kommunikation, Hochschule Hannover, Hannover.
ISM International School of Management, School of Management, Hamburg.
Gesundheitswesen. 2016 Dec;78(12):828-834. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1396848. Epub 2015 Mar 25.
Recently, the number of hospital report cards that compare quality of hospitals and present information from German quality reports has greatly increased. Objectives of this study were to a) identify suitable methods for measuring the readability and comprehensibility of hospital report cards, b) to obtain reliable information on the comprehensibility of texts for laymen, c) to give recommendations for improvements and d) to recommend public health actions. The readability and comprehensibility of the texts were tested with a) a computer-aided evaluation of formal text characteristics (readability indices Flesch (German formula) and 1. Wiener Sachtextformel formula), b) an expert-based heuristic analysis of readability and comprehensibility of texts (counting technical terms and analysis of text simplicity as well as brevity and conciseness using the Hamburg intelligibility model) and c) a survey of subjects about the comprehensibility of individual technical terms, the assessment of the comprehensibility of the presentations and the subjects' decisions in favour of one of the 5 presented clinics due to the better quality of data. In addition, the correlation between the results of the text analysis with the results from the survey of subjects was tested. The assessment of texts with the computer-aided evaluations showed poor comprehensibility values. The assessment of text simplicity using the Hamburg intelligibility model showed poor comprehensibility values (-0.3). On average, 6.8% of the words used were technical terms. A review of 10 technical terms revealed that in all cases only a minority of respondents (from 4.4% to 39.1%) exactly knew what was meant by each of them. Most subjects (62.4%) also believed that unclear terms worsened their understanding of the information offered. The correlation analysis showed that presentations with a lower frequency of technical terms and better values for the text simplicity were better understood. The determination of the frequency of technical terms and the assessment of text simplicity using the Hamburg intelligibility model were suitable methods to determine the readability and comprehensibility of presentations of quality indicators. The analysis showed predominantly poor comprehensibility values and indicated the need to improve the texts of report cards.
最近,比较医院质量并展示德国质量报告信息的医院报告卡数量大幅增加。本研究的目的是:a)确定衡量医院报告卡可读性和可理解性的合适方法;b)获取关于外行人对文本可理解性的可靠信息;c)给出改进建议;d)推荐公共卫生行动。通过以下方式测试文本的可读性和可理解性:a)对文本形式特征进行计算机辅助评估(可读性指数Flesch(德语公式)和1. Wiener Sachtextformel公式);b)基于专家的文本可读性和可理解性启发式分析(计算技术术语数量,并使用汉堡可理解性模型分析文本的简单性以及简洁性);c)对受试者进行调查,了解他们对各个技术术语的可理解性、对展示内容可理解性的评估以及由于数据质量更好而选择五家展示诊所之一的决定。此外,还测试了文本分析结果与受试者调查结果之间的相关性。计算机辅助评估对文本的评估显示可理解性值较低。使用汉堡可理解性模型对文本简单性的评估显示可理解性值较低(-0.3)。平均而言,所使用单词的6.8%是技术术语。对10个技术术语的审查表明,在所有情况下,只有少数受访者(从4.4%到39.1%)确切知道每个术语的含义。大多数受试者(62.4%)也认为不明确的术语会影响他们对所提供信息的理解。相关性分析表明,技术术语出现频率较低且文本简单性值较好的展示内容更容易被理解。确定技术术语的频率以及使用汉堡可理解性模型评估文本简单性是确定质量指标展示内容可读性和可理解性的合适方法。分析结果主要显示可理解性值较差,表明需要改进报告卡的文本。