文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
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
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
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 @ 2025

减重手术患者教育材料的可读性。

Readability of patient education materials for bariatric surgery.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Heersink School of Medicine, 1808 7th Ave South, BDB 505, Birmingham, AL, 35233, USA.

UAB Department of Surgery, 1808 7th Ave South, Boshell Diabetes Building, Suite 202, Birmingham, AL, 35233, USA.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2023 Aug;37(8):6519-6525. doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10153-3. Epub 2023 Jun 5.


DOI:10.1007/s00464-023-10153-3
PMID:37277519
Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Bariatric surgery is a successful treatment for obesity, but barriers to surgery exist, including low health literacy. National organizations recommend patient education materials (PEM) not exceed a sixth-grade reading level. Difficult to comprehend PEM can exacerbate barriers to bariatric surgery, especially in the Deep South where high obesity and low literacy rates exist. This study aimed to assess and compare the readability of webpages and electronic medical record (EMR) bariatric surgery PEM from one institution. METHODS: Readability of online bariatric surgery and standardized perioperative EMR PEM were analyzed and compared. Text readability was assessed by validated instruments: Flesch Reading Ease Formula (FRE), Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog (GF), Coleman-Liau Index (CL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Automated Readability Index (ARI), and Linsear Write Formula (LWF). Mean readability scores were calculated with standard deviations and compared using unpaired t-tests. RESULTS: 32 webpages and seven EMR education documents were analyzed. Webpages were overall "difficult to read" compared to "standard/average" readability EMR materials (mean FRE 50.5 ± 18.3 vs. 67.4 ± 4.2, p = 0.023). All webpages were at or above high school reading level: mean FKGL 11.8 ± 4.4, GF 14.0 ± 3.9, CL 9.5 ± 3.2, SMOG 11.0 ± 3.2, ARI 11.7 ± 5.1, and LWF 14.9 ± 6.6. Webpages with highest reading levels were nutrition information and lowest were patient testimonials. EMR materials were sixth to ninth grade reading level: FKGL 6.2 ± 0.8, GF 9.3 ± 1.4, CL 9.7 ± 0.9, SMOG 7.1 ± 0.8, ARI 6.1 ± 1.0, and LWF 5.9 ± 0.8. CONCLUSION: Surgeon curated bariatric surgery webpages have advanced reading levels above recommended thresholds compared to standardized PEM from an EMR. This readability gap may unintentionally contribute to barriers to surgery and affect postoperative outcomes. Streamlined efforts are needed to create materials that are easier to read and comply with recommendations.

摘要

简介:减重手术是肥胖症的有效治疗方法,但手术存在障碍,包括健康素养低。国家组织建议患者教育材料(PEM)不超过六年级阅读水平。难以理解的 PEM 会加剧减重手术的障碍,尤其是在肥胖率高和低识字率并存的美国南部腹地。本研究旨在评估和比较一家机构的网页和电子病历(EMR)减重手术 PEM 的可读性。 方法:分析并比较了在线减重手术和标准化围手术期 EMR PEM 的可读性。使用经过验证的工具评估文本可读性:弗莱什阅读舒适度公式(FRE)、弗莱什-金凯德年级水平(FKGL)、冈宁 Fog 指数(GF)、科尔曼-廖指数(CL)、简单测糊度公式(SMOG)、自动化可读性指数(ARI)和林赛写作公式(LWF)。使用未配对的 t 检验计算平均可读性得分及其标准差,并进行比较。 结果:分析了 32 个网页和 7 个 EMR 教育文件。与“标准/平均”可读性 EMR 材料相比,网页总体上“难以阅读”(平均 FRE 为 50.5±18.3 与 67.4±4.2,p=0.023)。所有网页的阅读水平均达到或高于高中水平:平均 FKGL 为 11.8±4.4、GF 为 14.0±3.9、CL 为 9.5±3.2、SMOG 为 11.0±3.2、ARI 为 11.7±5.1 和 LWF 为 14.9±6.6。阅读水平最高的是营养信息,最低的是患者 testimonials。EMR 材料为六年级至九年级阅读水平:FKGL 为 6.2±0.8、GF 为 9.3±1.4、CL 为 9.7±0.9、SMOG 为 7.1±0.8、ARI 为 6.1±1.0 和 LWF 为 5.9±0.8。 结论:与 EMR 中的标准化 PEM 相比,外科医生精心策划的减重手术网页的阅读水平高于推荐的门槛。这种可读性差距可能会无意中导致手术障碍,并影响术后结果。需要进行简化工作,以创建更易于阅读且符合建议的材料。

相似文献

[1]
Readability of patient education materials for bariatric surgery.

Surg Endosc. 2023-8

[2]
Currently Available Large Language Models Are Moderately Effective in Improving Readability of English and Spanish Patient Education Materials in Pediatric Orthopaedics.

J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2025-6-24

[3]
Readability of online patient education material for foregut surgery.

Surg Endosc. 2024-9

[4]
Can Artificial Intelligence Improve the Readability of Patient Education Materials?

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2023-11-1

[5]
Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Congenital Hand Differences.

Hand (N Y). 2024-10

[6]
Enhancing the Readability of Online Patient Education Materials Using Large Language Models: Cross-Sectional Study.

J Med Internet Res. 2025-6-4

[7]
Readability of patient education materials in ophthalmology: a single-institution study and systematic review.

BMC Ophthalmol. 2016-8-3

[8]
Improving the Readability of Institutional Heart Failure-Related Patient Education Materials Using GPT-4: Observational Study.

JMIR Cardio. 2025-7-8

[9]
The readability of online laryngectomy patient information: how do Australia and New Zealand compare?

N Z Med J. 2025-3-14

[10]
Readability and Quality of Online Information on Osteochondral Knee Injuries: An Objective Assessment.

Cureus. 2025-5-29

引用本文的文献

[1]
Patients' perceptions of bariatric surgery in the Deep South: the impact of health literacy.

Surg Endosc. 2025-7-8

[2]
Readability of AI-Generated Patient Information Leaflets on Alzheimer's, Vascular Dementia, and Delirium.

Cureus. 2025-6-6

[3]
Patient Educational Materials for Pheochromocytoma Exceed Recommended Readability Level: An Analysis Across Three Independent Reading Instruments.

J Cancer Educ. 2025-6-21

[4]
Evaluation of Protein Cards: A nutrition education tool for metabolic bariatric surgery.

PLoS One. 2025-6-12

[5]
Evaluation of Responses to Questions About Keratoconus Using ChatGPT-4.0, Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot: A Comparative Study of Large Language Models on Keratoconus.

Eye Contact Lens. 2025-3-1

[6]
Digital Education on Hospital Nutrition Diets: What Do Patients Want to Know?

Nutrients. 2024-9-30

[7]
Leveraging Generative Artificial Intelligence Models in Patient Education on Inferior Vena Cava Filters.

Clin Pract. 2024-7-30

[8]
Readability of online patient education material for foregut surgery.

Surg Endosc. 2024-9

[9]
Readability and quality assessment of online patient education materials for spinal and epidural anesthesia.

Can J Anaesth. 2024-8

[10]
Large language models and bariatric surgery patient education: a comparative readability analysis of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Bard, and online institutional resources.

Surg Endosc. 2024-5

本文引用的文献

[1]
Numeracy levels influence shared decision-making and surgical outcomes: A scoping review of the literature.

Am J Surg. 2023-6

[2]
Examining the Accessibility of Online Patient Materials for Bariatric Surgery.

Obes Surg. 2023-3

[3]
Quality and Readability of Online Patient Information on Adolescent Bariatric Surgery.

Obes Surg. 2023-1

[4]
Socioeconomic disparities and bariatric surgery outcomes: A qualitative analysis.

Am J Surg. 2023-4

[5]
The Patient Navigator: Can a systematically developed online health information tool improve patient participation and outcomes related to the consultation in older patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer?

BMC Cancer. 2022-1-25

[6]
Adherence to Medical Appointments Among Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery: Do Health Literacy, Health Numeracy, and Cognitive Functioning Play a Role?

Obes Surg. 2022-4

[7]
Adherence to Post-operative Appointments Is Associated with Weight Loss Following Bariatric Surgery.

Obes Surg. 2021-12

[8]
Ileostomy Patients Using Patient Engagement Technology Experience Decreased Length of Stay.

J Gastrointest Surg. 2022-3

[9]
The Living Donor Navigator Program Provides Support Tools for Caregivers.

Prog Transplant. 2021-3

[10]
The Influence of Health Literacy and Health Numeracy on Weight Loss Outcomes Following Bariatric Surgery.

Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2021-2

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索