• 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

评估重症监护学会在线患者教育材料的可读性。

Assessment of the Readability of the Online Patient Education Materials of Intensive and Critical Care Societies.

机构信息

Anesthesiology and Reanimation Department, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Tukey.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 2024 Feb 1;52(2):e47-e57. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000006121. Epub 2023 Nov 13.

DOI:10.1097/CCM.0000000000006121
PMID:37962133
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the readability of patient education materials (PEMs) on websites of intensive and critical care societies.

DATA SOURCES

Websites of intensive and critical care societies, which are members of The World Federation of Intensive and Critical Care and The European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.

SETTING

Cross-sectional observational, internet-based, website, PEMs, readability study.

STUDY SELECTION

The readability of the PEMs available on societies' sites was evaluated.

DATA EXTRACTION

The readability formulas used were the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Gunning Fog (GFOG).

DATA SYNTHESIS

One hundred twenty-seven PEM from 11 different societies were included in our study. In the readability analysis of PEM, the FRES was 58.10 (48.85-63.77) (difficult), the mean FKGL and SMOG were 10.19 (8.93-11.72) and 11.10 (10.11-11.87) years, respectively, and the mean GFOG score was 12.73 (11.37-14.15) (very difficult). All readability formula results were significantly higher than the recommended sixth-grade level ( p < 0.001). All PEMs were above the sixth-grade level when the societies were evaluated individually according to all readability results ( p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the sixth-grade level recommended by the American Medical Association and the National Institutes of Health, the readability of PEMs in intensive and critical care societies is relatively high. PEMs in intensive and critical care societies should be prepared with attention to recommendations on readability.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估重症和危重病学会网站上的患者教育材料(PEM)的可读性。

数据来源

重症和危重病学会的网站,这些学会是世界重症与危重病医学会和欧洲危重病医学会的成员。

设置

基于互联网的横断面观察性、网站、PEM、可读性研究。

研究选择

评估了各学会网站上提供的 PEM 的可读性。

数据提取

使用的可读性公式包括弗莱什阅读舒适度得分(FRES)、弗莱什-金凯德年级水平(FKGL)、简易斯莫格测试(SMOG)和古宁迷雾测试(GFOG)。

数据综合

我们的研究纳入了来自 11 个不同学会的 127 份 PEM。在 PEM 的可读性分析中,FRES 为 58.10(48.85-63.77)(困难),平均 FKGL 和 SMOG 分别为 10.19(8.93-11.72)和 11.10(10.11-11.87)年,平均 GFOG 评分为 12.73(11.37-14.15)(非常困难)。所有可读性公式结果均显著高于推荐的六年级水平(p<0.001)。根据所有可读性结果单独评估各学会时,所有 PEM 均高于六年级水平(p<0.05)。

结论

与美国医学协会和美国国立卫生研究院推荐的六年级水平相比,重症和危重病学会的 PEM 可读性相对较高。重症和危重病学会的 PEM 应根据可读性建议进行精心准备。

相似文献

1
Assessment of the Readability of the Online Patient Education Materials of Intensive and Critical Care Societies.评估重症监护学会在线患者教育材料的可读性。
Crit Care Med. 2024 Feb 1;52(2):e47-e57. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000006121. Epub 2023 Nov 13.
2
Assessing parental comprehension of online resources on childhood pain.评估父母对儿童疼痛在线资源的理解程度。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Jun 21;103(25):e38569. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038569.
3
Readability assessment of Internet-based patient education materials related to endoscopic sinus surgery.基于互联网的内镜鼻窦手术相关患者教育资料的可读性评估。
Laryngoscope. 2012 Aug;122(8):1649-54. doi: 10.1002/lary.23309. Epub 2012 Jun 8.
4
Readability assessment of online tracheostomy care resources.在线气管造口护理资源的可读性评估。
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015 Feb;152(2):272-8. doi: 10.1177/0194599814560338. Epub 2014 Dec 1.
5
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.
6
Readability assessment of internet-based patient education materials related to mammography for breast cancer screening.基于互联网的乳腺癌筛查乳腺X线摄影相关患者教育材料的可读性评估。
Acad Radiol. 2015 Mar;22(3):290-5. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2014.10.009. Epub 2014 Dec 5.
7
How readable and quality are online patient education materials about Helicobacter pylori?: Assessment of the readability, quality and reliability.关于幽门螺杆菌的在线患者教育材料的可读性和质量如何?:评估可读性、质量和可靠性。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2023 Oct 27;102(43):e35543. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000035543.
8
Readability of Patient Education Materials in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R): A Comparative Cross-Sectional Study.物理医学与康复(PM&R)患者教育材料的可读性:一项比较性横断面研究。
PM R. 2020 Apr;12(4):368-373. doi: 10.1002/pmrj.12230. Epub 2019 Sep 18.
9
Analysis of internet-based patient education materials related to pituitary tumors.基于互联网的垂体瘤患者教育材料分析
Endocr Pract. 2014 Oct;20(10):1044-50. doi: 10.4158/EP14114.OR.
10
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.

引用本文的文献

1
Digital health interventions in adult intensive care and recovery after critical illness to promote survivorship care.成人重症监护及危重症康复中的数字健康干预措施,以促进生存护理。
J Intensive Care Soc. 2025 Jan 4;26(1):96-104. doi: 10.1177/17511437241311105. eCollection 2025 Feb.
2
How artificial intelligence can provide information about subdural hematoma: Assessment of readability, reliability, and quality of ChatGPT, BARD, and perplexity responses.人工智能如何提供关于硬膜下血肿的信息:对ChatGPT、BARD和Perplexity回答的可读性、可靠性和质量评估。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 May 3;103(18):e38009. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038009.