Delaney Francis T, Doinn Tiarnán Ó, Broderick James M, Stanley Emma
Department of Radiology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Insights Imaging. 2021 Oct 21;12(1):148. doi: 10.1186/s13244-021-01094-3.
Increasing numbers of patients and carers rely on online resources for healthcare information. Radiation safety can be misunderstood by patients and clinicians and lead to patient anxiety. We aimed to assess the readability of online patient educational materials (PEMs) related to radiation safety.
A total of 84 articles pertaining to radiation safety from 14 well-known online resources were identified. PEMs were then analysed using Readability Studio Professional Edition Version 2019. Readability was assessed using eight different instruments: the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level, Raygor Estimate, SMOG, Coleman-Liau, Fry, FORCAST, Gunning Fog, and Flesch Reading Ease Score formula. The mean reading grade level (RGL) of each article was compared to the 6th and 8th grade reading level using 1-sample t-tests.
The cumulative mean RGL for all 84 articles was 13.3 (range = 8.6-17.4), and none were written at or below the 6th or 8th grade level. The cumulative mean RGL exceeded the 6th grade reading level by an average of 7.3 levels (95% CI, 6.8-7.8; p < 0.001) and the 8th grade level by an average of 5.3 grade levels (95% CI, 4.8-5.8; p < 0.001). The mean Flesch Reading Ease Score was 39/100 ('difficult').
Currently available online PEMs related to radiation safety are still written at higher than recommended reading levels. Radiation safety is a topic in which the specialist training of radiologists is crucial in providing guidance to patients. Addressing the readability of online PEMs can improve radiology-patient communication and support the shift to a patient-centred model of practice.
越来越多的患者和护理人员依赖在线资源获取医疗保健信息。患者和临床医生可能会误解辐射安全，从而导致患者焦虑。我们旨在评估与辐射安全相关的在线患者教育材料（PEM）的可读性。
从14个知名在线资源中识别出84篇与辐射安全相关的文章。然后使用Readability Studio Professional Edition 2019版对PEM进行分析。使用八种不同的工具评估可读性：弗莱什-金凯德阅读年级水平、雷戈尔估计法、简化的雾度指数、科尔曼-廖公式、弗莱阅读法、预测法、冈宁雾度指数和弗莱什阅读易度得分公式。使用单样本t检验将每篇文章的平均阅读年级水平（RGL）与六年级和八年级阅读水平进行比较。
所有84篇文章的累积平均RGL为13.3（范围=8.6-17.4），没有一篇文章的写作水平达到或低于六年级或八年级水平。累积平均RGL比六年级阅读水平平均高出7.3个等级（95%置信区间，6.8-7.8；p<0.001），比八年级水平平均高出5.3个等级（95%置信区间，4.8-5.8；p<0.001）。平均弗莱什阅读易度得分为39/100（“困难”）。
目前可用的与辐射安全相关的在线PEM的写作水平仍高于推荐的阅读水平。辐射安全是一个领域，放射科医生的专业培训对于为患者提供指导至关重要。解决在线PEM的可读性问题可以改善放射科医生与患者之间的沟通，并支持向以患者为中心的实践模式转变。
