School of Biomedical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, United Kingdom.
Laboratory for Disinfection and Pathogen Elimination Studies, Northern Ireland Public Health Laboratory, Belfast City Hospital, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Br J Biomed Sci. 2024 Oct 22;81:13566. doi: 10.3389/bjbs.2024.13566. eCollection 2024.
Tuberculosis (TB) continues be the leading cause of death globally due to an infectious agent. There is a paucity of data describing the readability of patient-facing TB information for service users. The aim of this study was to calculate the readability of multiple global TB information sources.
Information on tuberculosis (n = 150 sources) included nine categories, WHO publications (n = 17), International governments (n = 19), Hospitals (n = 10), Non-government organisations (NGOs)/charities (n = 20), Cochrane Plain Language Summaries (n = 20); LabTestsOnlineUK (n = 4) and Clinical trials (n = 20), Cochrane abstracts (n = 20), Scientific abstracts (n = 20). Readability was calculated using Readable software, defined by (i) Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), (ii) Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), (iii) Gunning Fog Index and (iv) SMOG Index and two text metrics [words/sentence, syllables/word].
Mean readability values for TB information for the FRE and FKGL were 35.6 ± 1.6 (standard error of mean (SEM)) (US Target ≥60; UK Target ≥90) and 12.3 ± 0.3 (US Target ≤8; UK Target ≤6), respectively, with mean words per sentence and syllables per word of 17.2 and 1.8, respectively. Cochrane Plain Language Summaries had similar readability scores to their matching scientific abstract (p = 0.15). LabTestsOnlineUK yielded a mean FRE score of 51.5 ± 1.2, a mean FKGL score of 10.2 ± 0.5 and text metric scores of 16.7 ± 2.3 and 1.6, for words per sentence and syllables per word, respectively. In descending order, TB information from international governments, hospitals and LabTestsOnlineUK were the most readable (FRE = 57.9, 54.1 and 51.5, respectively), whereas scientific abstracts and Cochrane abstracts were the most difficult to read (13.0 and 30.2, respectively).
Patient-facing TB information analysed had poor readability. Effective communication of biomedical science concepts and information relating to TB is vital for service users to enhance their health literacy of tuberculosis, thereby promoting better clinical outcomes. Biomedical scientists are important custodians of scientific information for their service user populations, including other healthcare professionals within the TB multidisciplinary (MDT) team and patient service users. When preparing TB information, this should be checked and modified in real time employing readability calculators, to align with health readability targets.
结核病（TB）仍然是全球导致死亡的主要原因，因为它是一种传染性病原体。描述面向患者的结核病信息对服务用户的可读性的数据很少。本研究的目的是计算多种全球结核病信息来源的可读性。
结核病信息（n=150 个来源）包括九类，世界卫生组织出版物（n=17），国际政府（n=19），医院（n=10），非政府组织/慈善机构（n=20），考科蓝简化语言摘要（n=20）；LabTestsOnlineUK（n=4）和临床试验（n=20），考科蓝摘要（n=20），科学摘要（n=20）。使用 Readable 软件计算可读性，可读性由（i）弗莱什阅读容易度（FRE），（ii）弗莱什-金凯德年级水平（FKGL），（iii）冈宁雾度指数和（iv）斯莫格指数以及两个文本指标[单词/句子，音节/单词]来定义。
FRE 和 FKGL 的结核病信息可读性平均值分别为 35.6±1.6（均数的标准误差（SEM））（美国目标≥60；英国目标≥90）和 12.3±0.3（美国目标≤8；英国目标≤6），句子中的平均单词数和音节/单词数分别为 17.2 和 1.8。考科蓝简化语言摘要与匹配的科学摘要具有相似的可读性得分（p=0.15）。LabTestsOnlineUK 的平均 FRE 得分为 51.5±1.2，平均 FKGL 得分为 10.2±0.5，单词/句子和音节/单词的文本指标得分为 16.7±2.3 和 1.6。按降序排列，国际政府、医院和 LabTestsOnlineUK 的结核病信息最易读（FRE=57.9、54.1 和 51.5），而科学摘要和考科蓝摘要最难读（13.0 和 30.2）。
分析的面向患者的结核病信息可读性较差。有效沟通与结核病相关的生物医学科学概念和信息对于提高服务用户的结核病健康素养至关重要，从而改善临床结局。生物医学科学家是其服务用户群体（包括结核病多学科团队中的其他医疗保健专业人员和患者服务用户）的科学信息的重要保管人。在准备结核病信息时，应使用可读性计算器实时检查和修改信息，使其与健康可读性目标保持一致。
