• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Interrater reliability of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT).患者教育材料评估工具(PEMAT)的评分者间信度。
Patient Educ Couns. 2018 Mar;101(3):490-496. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.09.003. Epub 2017 Sep 6.
2
Development of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT): a new measure of understandability and actionability for print and audiovisual patient information.患者教育材料评估工具(PEMAT)的开发:一种针对印刷和视听患者信息的可理解性和可操作性的新测量方法。
Patient Educ Couns. 2014 Sep;96(3):395-403. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2014.05.027. Epub 2014 Jun 12.
3
Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Validation of the Japanese Version of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT).《患者教育材料评估工具(PEMAT)日本版的翻译、跨文化调适和验证》。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Nov 26;19(23):15763. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192315763.
4
Health Literacy in Shoulder Arthroscopy: A Quantitative Assessment of the Understandability and Readability of Online Patient Education Material.肩关镜手术中的健康素养:对在线患者教育材料的可理解性和可读性的定量评估。
Iowa Orthop J. 2024;44(1):151-158.
5
Understandability, actionability, and readability of online patient education materials about diabetes mellitus.糖尿病在线患者教育资料的可理解性、可操作性和可读性。
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2019 Jan 25;76(3):182-186. doi: 10.1093/ajhp/zxy021.
6
Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Quantitative Assessment of Online Patient Education Resources.全膝关节置换术:在线患者教育资源的定量评估。
Iowa Orthop J. 2022;42(2):98-106.
7
What's in Between the Lines: Assessing the Readability, Understandability, and Actionability in Breast Cancer Survivorship Print Materials.字里行间的信息:评估乳腺癌生存者印刷材料的可阅读性、可理解性和可操作性。
J Cancer Educ. 2022 Oct;37(5):1532-1539. doi: 10.1007/s13187-021-02003-4. Epub 2021 Apr 6.
8
Assessing the Understandability and Actionability of Online Neurosurgical Patient Education Materials.评估在线神经外科学患者教育材料的易懂性和可操作性。
World Neurosurg. 2019 Oct;130:e588-e597. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.06.166. Epub 2019 Jun 29.
9
Are Online Zenker's Diverticulum Materials Readable and Understandable?在线的Zenker憩室资料是否易于阅读和理解?
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016 Nov;155(5):758-763. doi: 10.1177/0194599816655302. Epub 2016 Jun 21.
10
Health Literacy in Clubfoot: A Quantitative Assessment of the Readability, Understandability and Actionability of Online Patient Education Material.足踝畸形患者的健康素养:在线患者教育材料的可阅读性、可理解性和可操作性的定量评估。
Iowa Orthop J. 2021;41(1):61-67.

引用本文的文献

1
Quality assessment of spinal cord injury-related health information on short-form video platforms: Cross-sectional content analysis of TikTok, Kwai, and BiliBili.短视频平台上脊髓损伤相关健康信息的质量评估:对TikTok、快手和哔哩哔哩的横断面内容分析
Digit Health. 2025 Sep 2;11:20552076251374226. doi: 10.1177/20552076251374226. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
2
Early Feedback for the Development of a Novel Brief Colon Cancer Screening Decision Aid for Adults ≥75 years at Risk for Limited Health Literacy: A Pilot Study.针对健康素养有限的75岁及以上有结肠癌筛查风险的成年人开发新型简短结肠癌筛查决策辅助工具的早期反馈:一项试点研究
Cancer Control. 2025 Jan-Dec;32:10732748251372677. doi: 10.1177/10732748251372677. Epub 2025 Aug 28.
3
An Evaluation of Online Resources for Paediatric Tube Feeding in Aotearoa New Zealand: A Document Analysis.新西兰奥塔哥地区儿科管饲在线资源评估:文献分析
J Hum Nutr Diet. 2025 Aug;38(4):e70107. doi: 10.1111/jhn.70107.
4
Using learner verification and transcreation to develop multicultural patient education materials for acute respiratory tract infections to decrease inappropriate antibiotic prescribing.利用学习者验证和创译来开发针对急性呼吸道感染的多元文化患者教育材料,以减少不恰当的抗生素处方。
PEC Innov. 2025 Jun 27;7:100415. doi: 10.1016/j.pecinn.2025.100415. eCollection 2025 Dec.
5
YouTube and Bilibili as sources of information on oral cancer: cross-sectional content analysis study.YouTube和哔哩哔哩作为口腔癌信息来源:横断面内容分析研究
Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 1;15(1):21671. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-02898-9.
6
Arabic version of the patient education materials assessment tool (PEMAT): translation and validation.患者教育材料评估工具(PEMAT)的阿拉伯语版本:翻译与验证
Saudi Pharm J. 2025 Jun 5;33(3):15. doi: 10.1007/s44446-025-00013-7.
7
TikTok's cardiopulmonary exercise testing videos: A content analysis of quality and misinformation.抖音的心肺运动测试视频:质量与错误信息的内容分析。
Digit Health. 2025 May 15;11:20552076251341090. doi: 10.1177/20552076251341090. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
8
Developing Catchment Area Data Dashboards for Cancer Centers: A Stakeholder-engaged Approach.为癌症中心开发集水区数据仪表板:一种利益相关者参与的方法。
Prev Oncol Epidemiol. 2024;2(1). doi: 10.1080/28322134.2024.2394193. Epub 2024 Aug 25.
9
Designing and validating a patient education model for cardiovascular patients: protocol for a multilevel mixed-method study.设计并验证心血管疾病患者的患者教育模型:一项多层次混合方法研究方案
BMJ Open. 2025 Apr 8;15(4):e092234. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-092234.
10
Promoting Health Literacy With Human-in-the-Loop Video Understandability Classification of YouTube Videos: Development and Evaluation Study.通过YouTube视频的人在回路视频可理解性分类促进健康素养:开发与评估研究
J Med Internet Res. 2025 Apr 8;27:e56080. doi: 10.2196/56080.

本文引用的文献

1
Information quality and dynamics of patients' interactions on tonsillectomy web resources.扁桃体切除术网络资源上患者互动的信息质量与动态
Internet Interv. 2016 May 18;4:99-104. doi: 10.1016/j.invent.2016.05.002. eCollection 2016 May.
2
Community knowledge of law at the end of life: availability and accessibility of web-based resources.临终阶段的社区法律知识:网络资源的可用性与可获取性
Aust Health Rev. 2018 Jun;42(3):266-271. doi: 10.1071/AH16234.
3
Assessment of readability, understandability, and completeness of pediatric hospital medicine discharge instructions.评估儿科医院出院指导的可读性、易懂性和完整性。
J Hosp Med. 2017 Feb;12(2):98-101. doi: 10.12788/jhm.2688.
4
Health Literacy Demand of Printed Lifestyle Patient Information Materials Aimed at People With Chronic Kidney Disease: Are Materials Easy to Understand and Act On and Do They Use Meaningful Visual Aids?针对慢性肾病患者的印刷版生活方式患者信息材料的健康素养需求:这些材料是否易于理解和付诸行动,以及它们是否使用了有意义的视觉辅助工具?
J Health Commun. 2017 Feb;22(2):163-170. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2016.1258744. Epub 2017 Jan 25.
5
Are Online Zenker's Diverticulum Materials Readable and Understandable?在线的Zenker憩室资料是否易于阅读和理解?
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016 Nov;155(5):758-763. doi: 10.1177/0194599816655302. Epub 2016 Jun 21.
6
Opportunities to improve clinical summaries for patients at hospital discharge.改善患者出院时临床总结的机会。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 May;26(5):372-380. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-005201. Epub 2016 May 6.
7
Readability and Understandability of Online Vocal Cord Paralysis Materials.在线声带麻痹资料的可读性和易懂性。
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016 Mar;154(3):460-4. doi: 10.1177/0194599815626146. Epub 2016 Feb 9.
8
Using the Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkit to Improve the Quality of Patient Materials.使用健康素养通用预防措施工具包提高患者资料质量。
J Health Commun. 2015;20 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):69-76. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2015.1081997.
9
Online maritime health information: an overview of the situation.在线海洋健康信息:现状概述
Int Marit Health. 2015;66(3):139-44. doi: 10.5603/IMH.2015.0028.
10
Evaluating the usefulness of patient education materials on surgical site infection: a systematic assessment.评估患者教育材料对手术部位感染的有用性:一项系统评估。
Am J Infect Control. 2015 Feb;43(2):167-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2014.10.020. Epub 2014 Dec 23.

患者教育材料评估工具(PEMAT)的评分者间信度。

Interrater reliability of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT).

机构信息

Patient and Caregiver Engagement, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.

Patient and Caregiver Engagement, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.

出版信息

Patient Educ Couns. 2018 Mar;101(3):490-496. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.09.003. Epub 2017 Sep 6.

DOI:10.1016/j.pec.2017.09.003
PMID:28899713
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5839932/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess the interrater reliability (IRR) and usability of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) and the relationship between PEMAT scores and readability levels.

METHODS

One hundred ten materials (80 print, 30 audiovisual) were evaluated, each by two raters, using the PEMAT. IRR was calculated using Gwet's AC1 and summarized across items in each PEMAT domain (understandability and actionability) and by material type. A survey was conducted to solicit raters' experience using the PEMAT. Readability of each material was assessed using the SMOG Index.

RESULTS

The median IRR was 0.92 for understandability and 0.93 for actionability across all relevant items, indicating good IRR. Eight PEMAT items had Gwet's AC1 values less than 0.81. PEMAT and SMOG Index scores were inversely correlated, with a Spearman's rho of -0.20 (p=0.081) for understandability and -0.15 (p=0.194) for actionability. While 92% of raters agreed the PEMAT was easy to use, survey results suggested specific items for clarification.

CONCLUSION

While the PEMAT demonstrates moderate to excellent IRR overall, amendments to items with lower IRR may increase the usefulness of the tool.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The PEMAT is a useful supplement to reading level alone in the assessment of educational materials.

摘要

目的

评估患者教育材料评估工具(PEMAT)的评分者间信度(IRR)和可用性,以及 PEMAT 评分与可读性水平之间的关系。

方法

使用 PEMAT 对 110 种材料(80 种印刷品,30 种视听材料)进行评估,每种材料由两名评分者进行评估。使用 Gwet 的 AC1 计算 IRR,并汇总 PEMAT 每个领域(可理解性和可操作性)和每种材料类型的所有项目的 IRR。进行了一项调查,以征求评分者使用 PEMAT 的经验。使用简单平均五级评分法(SMOG)指数评估每种材料的可读性。

结果

所有相关项目的可理解性和可操作性的中位数 IRR 分别为 0.92 和 0.93,表明 IRR 良好。八项 PEMAT 项目的 Gwet 的 AC1 值低于 0.81。PEMAT 和 SMOG 指数得分呈负相关,可理解性的 Spearman rho 为-0.20(p=0.081),可操作性的 Spearman rho 为-0.15(p=0.194)。虽然 92%的评分者认为 PEMAT 易于使用,但调查结果表明需要对特定项目进行澄清。

结论

虽然 PEMAT 总体上显示出中等至良好的 IRR,但对 IRR 较低的项目进行修订可能会提高该工具的有用性。

实践意义

在评估教育材料时,PEMAT 是阅读水平的有用补充。