• 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

针对阑尾切除术患者的在线教育材料质量较好,但可读性较差。

Online educational materials for appendectomy patients have good quality but poor readability.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia & Paul's Hospital, C303 1081 Burrard Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6Z 1Y6, Canada.

出版信息

Am J Surg. 2021 Jun;221(6):1203-1210. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.02.022. Epub 2021 Mar 3.

DOI:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.02.022
PMID:33712262
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend patient health-related information be written at or below the sixth-grade level. This study evaluates the readability level and quality of online appendectomy patient education materials.

METHODS

Webpages were evaluated using seven readability formulae: Flesh-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), Automated Readability Index (ARI), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), and New Dale-Chall (NDC). Two evaluators assessed quality using the Brief DISCERN tool.

RESULTS

Thirty seven webpages were analyzed. The mean readability scores were: FKGL = 9.11, GFI = 11.82, CLI = 10.84, ARI = 7.99, SMOG = 11.88, FRE = 51.17, and NDC = 5.48. 6 of the 7 readability formulae indicate that the materials were written at too high a level. The average Brief DISCERN score was 17.81, indicating good quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Readability levels for online appendectomy patient education materials are higher than recommended but are of good quality. Authors of such materials should not only provide good quality information but also ensure readability.

摘要

背景

指南建议将患者相关的健康信息书写至六年级或以下水平。本研究评估了在线阑尾切除术患者教育材料的可读性和质量。

方法

使用七种可读性公式评估网页:Flesh-Kincaid 年级水平(FKGL)、Gunning Fog 指数(GFI)、Coleman-Liau 指数(CLI)、自动化可读性指数(ARI)、简单文字难度测试(SMOG)、Flesch 阅读舒适度(FRE)和新 Dale-Chall(NDC)。两名评估者使用 Brief DISCERN 工具评估质量。

结果

分析了 37 个网页。平均可读性得分分别为:FKGL=9.11,GFI=11.82,CLI=10.84,ARI=7.99,SMOG=11.88,FRE=51.17,NDC=5.48。7 种可读性公式中的 6 种表明材料的书写水平过高。平均 Brief DISCERN 得分为 17.81,表明质量良好。

结论

在线阑尾切除术患者教育材料的可读性水平高于推荐水平,但质量良好。此类材料的作者不仅应提供高质量的信息,还应确保可读性。

相似文献

1
Online educational materials for appendectomy patients have good quality but poor readability.针对阑尾切除术患者的在线教育材料质量较好,但可读性较差。
Am J Surg. 2021 Jun;221(6):1203-1210. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.02.022. Epub 2021 Mar 3.
2
Readability and quality assessment of online patient education materials for spinal and epidural anesthesia.在线脊髓和硬膜外麻醉患者教育材料的可读性和质量评估。
Can J Anaesth. 2024 Aug;71(8):1092-1102. doi: 10.1007/s12630-024-02771-9. Epub 2024 May 21.
3
Assessment of online patient education materials from major ophthalmologic associations.主要眼科协会在线患者教育材料评估。
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015 Apr;133(4):449-54. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2014.6104.
4
Readability of patient education materials for bariatric surgery.减重手术患者教育材料的可读性。
Surg Endosc. 2023 Aug;37(8):6519-6525. doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10153-3. Epub 2023 Jun 5.
5
A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the Readability of Online Information Regarding Hip Osteoarthritis.关于髋骨关节炎在线信息可读性的横断面分析。
Cureus. 2024 May 18;16(5):e60536. doi: 10.7759/cureus.60536. eCollection 2024 May.
6
The quality, understandability, readability, and popularity of online educational materials for heart murmur.心脏杂音在线教育资料的质量、易懂性、可理解性和普及性。
Cardiol Young. 2020 Mar;30(3):328-336. doi: 10.1017/S104795111900307X. Epub 2019 Dec 26.
7
Readability assessment of online ophthalmic patient information.在线眼科患者信息的可读性评估。
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013 Dec;131(12):1610-6. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2013.5521.
8
Readability assessment of patient educational materials for pediatric spinal deformity from top academic orthopedic institutions.顶级学术骨科机构的小儿脊柱畸形患者教育材料的可读性评估。
Spine Deform. 2022 Nov;10(6):1315-1321. doi: 10.1007/s43390-022-00545-1. Epub 2022 Jul 11.
9
Readability of online monkeypox patient education materials: Improved recognition of health literacy is needed for dissemination of infectious disease information.在线猴痘患者教育材料的易读性:为了传播传染病信息,需要提高对健康素养的认识。
Infect Dis Health. 2023 May;28(2):88-94. doi: 10.1016/j.idh.2022.11.002. Epub 2022 Dec 21.
10
Quality, Reliability, Readability, and Accountability of Online Information on Leukocoria.关于白瞳症的在线信息的质量、可靠性、可读性和可问责性。
J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2024 Sep-Oct;61(5):332-338. doi: 10.3928/01913913-20240425-02. Epub 2024 May 30.

引用本文的文献

1
Readability and Quality of Online Health Information Regarding Parathyroidectomy.关于甲状旁腺切除术的在线健康信息的可读性和质量
OTO Open. 2022 Oct 20;6(4):2473974X221133308. doi: 10.1177/2473974X221133308. eCollection 2022 Oct-Dec.
2
Down the Rabbit Hole: Evaluation of Internet Information Quality in Parathyroid and Thyroid Surgery.坠入兔子洞:甲状旁腺和甲状腺手术中互联网信息质量的评估。
J Surg Res. 2023 Feb;282:65-70. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2022.09.004. Epub 2022 Oct 17.