scholarly journals Readability Level of Spanish-Language Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Audiology and Otolaryngology

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 309-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Coco ◽  
Sonia Colina ◽  
Samuel R. Atcherson ◽  
Nicole Marrone
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Reading Level ◽  
Spanish Language ◽  
Lower Grade ◽  
Written Text ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Grade Reading Level ◽  
Readability Level

Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine the readability level of the Spanish versions of several audiology- and otolaryngology-related patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and include a readability analysis of 2 translation approaches when available—the published version and a “functionalist” version—using a team-based collaborative approach including community members. Method Readability levels were calculated using the Fry Graph adapted for Spanish, as well as the Fernandez-Huerta and the Spaulding formulae for several commonly used audiology- and otolaryngology-related PROMs. Results Readability calculations agreed with previous studies analyzing audiology-related PROMs in English and demonstrated many Spanish-language PROMs were beyond the 5th grade reading level suggested for health-related materials written for the average population. In addition, the functionalist versions of the PROMs yielded lower grade-level (improved) readability levels than the published versions. Conclusion Our results suggest many of the Spanish-language PROMs evaluated here are beyond the recommended readability levels and may be influenced by the approach to translation. Moreover, improved readability may be possible using a functionalist approach to translation. Future analysis of the suitability of outcome measures and the quality of their translations should move beyond readability and include an evaluation of the individual's comprehension of the written text.

scholarly journals Readability of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Adult Audiologic Rehabilitation

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alana Douglas ◽  
Rebecca J. Kelly-Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Health Literacy ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Reading Level ◽  
Response Scale ◽  
Grade Levels ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Grade Reading Level ◽  
Audiologic Rehabilitation

Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine the readability of published patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) designed for use in adult audiologic rehabilitation. The readability results were compared with the readability levels recommended for health information by health literacy experts. Method Reading grade levels were calculated using the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level Formula (Flesch, 1948), Gunning Fog Index (Gunning, 1952), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (McLaughlin, 1969), and FORCAST (Caylor, Sticht, Fox, & Ford, 1973) readability formulas for 10 published PROMs. Descriptive statistics were computed across the different PROM sections: instructions, items, response scale, and overall contents of the measure directed toward respondents. Results The majority of the PROM sections exceeded the 6th grade reading level recommended by health literacy experts, regardless of the formula applied. All PROM sections exceeded the 6th grade reading level when calculated according to the FORCAST formula, the most appropriate readability formula for use with a nonnarrative text format, such as PROMs. Conclusions When developing or reevaluating PROMs designed for use in adult audiologic rehabilitation, researchers should consider ways to improve the readability of their measure, as poor readability may affect the validity of the empirical data collected using the PROM. Additionally, the adequate readability of audiologic PROMs is required if patient/family-centered care values are to be adhered to within the field of adult audiologic rehabilitation.

scholarly journals Readability and Suitability of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Foot and Ankle Surgery: A Health Literacy Assessment

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 2473011420S0021
Author(s):  
Christina Freibott ◽  
Seth C. Shoap ◽  
J. Turner Vosseller
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Grade Level ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Reading Level ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Reading Grade Level ◽  
Ankle Surgery ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Grade Reading Level

Category: Other; Ankle; Hindfoot; Midfoot/Forefoot; Trauma Introduction/Purpose: Health literacy is consistently reported as one of the best predictors of health status. This becomes even more important considering the complex medical information that is communicated to a patient during a clinical visit. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used on a standard of care basis in orthopedic surgery, and consistently included in research projects to elucidate meaningful clinical information. While there have been published assessments on the reading grade level of orthopedic PROMs in general, few address foot and ankle specific outcome measures. There have been no reports on aesthetic component of these PROMs, which have a major impact on readability. The purpose of this study is to report on the literacy, readability, and suitability of PROMs in foot and ankle surgery. Methods: A PubMed search was conducted to identify the most frequently utilized foot and ankle PROMs. Two recent systematic reviews identified 86 total PROMs in orthopedic surgery, 8 of which were foot and ankle specific. For the readability component, the Flesh-Kincaid reading grade level was assessed for each PROM. For the aesthetic component, the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) was utilized to assess for content, literacy demand, graphics, layout, typography, learning stimulation, motivation and cultural appropriateness. SAM is a validated measure for analyzing print materials, and designate rankings of not suitable, adequate, or superior, based on results of the analysis. SAM scores were evaluated for all included PROMs by two investigators and averaged together for increased validity. Descriptive statistics were performed on all results. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS Version 24.0. Results: The average Flesh-Kincaid grade for all PROMs was 6.12 (+-2.2, range 3.9-8.5). 5 of the 8 (62.5%) PROMs were at or below the AMA-recommended 6th grade reading level, with 6 of 8 (75.0%) below the NIH-recommended 8th grade reading level. The average SAM score for all included foot and ankle PROMs was ‘adequate,’ receiving a score of 1. 1 PROM was designated ‘not suitable,’ with the remaining 7 deemed ‘adequate.’ The area that scored the lowest on the SAM assessment was the ‘graphics’ section. Conclusion: The PROMs used in foot and ankle surgery perform well on the Flesh-Kincaid score in comparison to both the AMA and NIH reading grade level standards. The highest rating for the SAM score was average, indicating room for improvement in suitability. The inclusion of graphics and illustrations would make these scores more easily understood by patients, which can improve their healthcare experience and improve patient satisfaction and health outcomes.

scholarly journals Patient-reported outcome measures in ophthalmology: too difficult to read?

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e000693
Author(s):  
Deanna J Taylor ◽  
Lee Jones ◽  
Laura Edwards ◽  
David P Crabb
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Grade Level ◽  
Sixth Grade ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Reading Level ◽  
Age Related Macular Degeneration ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Patient Reported

ObjectivePatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used in clinical trials and research. Yet, in order to be effective, a PROM needs to be understandable to respondents. The aim of this cross-sectional analysis was to assess reading level of PROMs validated for use in common eye conditions.Methods and analysisReadability measures determine the level of education a person is expected to have attained to be able to read a passage of text; this was calculated using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, FORCAST and Gunning-Fog tests within readability calculations software package Oleander Readability Studio 2012.1. Forty PROMs, previously validated for use in at least one of age-related macular degeneration, glaucoma and/or diabetic retinopathy, were identified for inclusion via a systematic literature search. The American Medical Association (AMA) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommend patient materials should not exceed a sixth-grade reading level. Number of PROMs exceeding this level was calculated.ResultsMedian (IQR) readability scores were 7.9 (5.4–10.5), 9.9 (8.9–10.7) and 8.4 (6.9–11.1) for Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, FORCAST and Gunning-Fog test, respectively. Depending on metric used, this meant 61% (95% CI 45% to 76%), 100% (95% CI 91% to 100%) and 80% (95% CI 65% to 91%) exceeded the recommended threshold.ConclusionMost PROMs commonly used in ophthalmology require a higher reading level than that recommended by the AMA and NIH and likely contain questions that are too difficult for many patients to read. Greater care is needed in designing PROMs appropriate for the literacy level of a population.

Impact of Depression on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Lumbar Spine Decompression

Spine ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 434-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert K. Merrill ◽  
Lukas P. Zebala ◽  
Colleen Peters ◽  
Sheeraz A. Qureshi ◽  
Steven J. McAnany
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Reported
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document