Dollahite J, Thompson C, McNew R
Department of Home Economics, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville 72701, USA.
Patient Educ Couns. 1996 Mar;27(2):123-34. doi: 10.1016/0738-3991(95)00829-2.
This study surveyed nutrition education materials which are low in cost, brief and the type most used in patient education to determine which might be useful with low literacy clients. Readability of 209 pamphlets from professional health organizations, commercial organizations, government agencies, and educational institutions was assessed using three different tests. Using the Flesch and Raygor tests, materials from educational institutions had significantly lower reading levels than materials from professional organizations and government agencies. No significant differences were seen among the sources using the Fry test. Sixty-eight percent (142) of the publications were written at ninth grade level or higher. Eleven percent (24) scored at sixth grade or below on either the Fry or Raygor scale. Only two publications were written at the third grade level. Many of the publications reviewed can be read and understood by many Americans, but there were few for the millions that have limited literacy skills.
本研究调查了成本低、篇幅简短且在患者教育中使用最为频繁的营养教育材料,以确定哪些材料可能对文化程度低的客户有用。使用三种不同的测试方法评估了来自专业健康组织、商业组织、政府机构和教育机构的209份宣传册的可读性。根据弗莱什和雷戈尔测试,教育机构的材料阅读水平明显低于专业组织和政府机构的材料。使用弗莱测试时,各来源之间未发现显著差异。68%(142份)的出版物写作水平达到九年级或更高。11%(24份)在弗莱或雷戈尔量表上得分在六年级或以下。只有两份出版物写作水平为三年级。许多被审查的出版物许多美国人都能阅读和理解,但针对数百万文化程度有限人群的却很少。