East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA.
Health Promot Pract. 2022 Jan;23(1):17-19. doi: 10.1177/1524839920984790. Epub 2021 Jan 12.
The quality of patient education materials is an important issue for health educators, clinicians, and community health workers. We describe a challenge achieving reliable scores between coders when using the Patient Educational Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) to evaluate farmworker health materials in spring 2020. Four coders were unable to achieve reliability after three attempts at coding calibration. Further investigation identified improvements to the PEMAT codebook and evidence of the difficulty of achieving traditional interrater reliability in the form of Krippendorff's alpha. Our solution was to use multiple raters and average ratings to achieve an acceptable score with an intraclass correlation coefficient. Practitioners using the PEMAT to evaluate materials should consider averaging the scores of multiple raters as PEMAT results otherwise may be highly sensitive to who is doing the rating. Not doing so may inadvertently result in the use of suboptimal patient education materials.
患者教育材料的质量是健康教育者、临床医生和社区卫生工作者关注的重要问题。我们描述了在 2020 年春季使用患者教育材料评估工具(PEMAT)评估农场工人健康材料时,编码员之间难以获得可靠评分的挑战。四名编码员在三次编码校准尝试后仍无法达到可靠性。进一步的调查确定了对 PEMAT 编码手册的改进,并以 Krippendorff 的 alpha 形式证明了在传统评分者间信度方面存在困难。我们的解决方案是使用多个评分者并取平均值,以获得可接受的评分,采用组内相关系数。使用 PEMAT 评估材料的从业者应考虑取多个评分者的平均分,因为否则 PEMAT 的结果可能对评分者的身份非常敏感。如果不这样做,可能会无意中使用效果不佳的患者教育材料。