scholarly journals Writing for the Wider Public - Readability of Publicly Available Board Reports

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 45-53
Author(s):  
Benedict Okonjo ◽  
Parul Kaithwas ◽  
Jing Miao ◽  
Mark Mackay ◽  
Vanessa North
Keyword(s):  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
South Australia ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Health Networks ◽  
The Public ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
Ease Score ◽  
Foundation Trusts

Objective: This work aims to evaluate the readability of publicly available board reports from the Local Health Networks (LHNs) in South Australia and the National Health Service (NHS) Trusts in England. Method: Publicly available board reports from the LHNs in South Australia and NHS Trusts in England were identified, screened, and evaluated from January 2020 to August 2020. Results: The average Flesch Reading Ease score for all LHNs reviewed ranged from 34 ± 10.2 to 57 ± 0.0 (Difficult to Fairly Difficult). In comparison, the average Flesch Reading Ease score for all the NHS Foundation Trusts ranged from 46 ± 1.7 to 60 ± 3.0 (Difficult to Standard). The average Reading Ease score for metropolitan and non-metropolitan LHNs was 43 ± 8.1 and 41 ±  6.0 (Difficult to read). In contrast, the average Reading Ease score for metropolitan and non-metropolitan NHS Trust was Fairly Difficult with 53 ± 4.2 and 50 ± 3.5 respectively. Conclusion: The evaluation results suggest that there is scope for improving the quality of publicly available board reports from the boards reviewed in terms of their readability by the public.

Community Involvement in Hospital Governance in Britain: Evidence from before the National Health Service

2008 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 751-771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Gorsky
Keyword(s):  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
National Health ◽  
Community Involvement ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Popular Participation ◽  
Hospital Governance ◽  
The Public ◽  
Foundation Trusts ◽  
Health Care Governance

An important goal of policy in the British National Health Service (NHS) is to increase public involvement in health care governance. In the hospital sector this led in 2003 to the establishment of foundation trusts with “membership communities,” which aim to give local citizens a say in management. This is not the first attempt to introduce greater community participation in the running of British hospitals. Prior to the inception of the NHS in 1948, the hospital contributory scheme movement provided ordinary members of the public with the opportunity to sit on hospital management boards. The article examines the nature and extent of this earlier experiment with local democracy in hospital governance. It argues that historical precedent is not particularly encouraging, either for the prospect of broadening popular participation or for making services more responsive to local needs. Although today's context is very different, the tendency for managerial and professional interests to dominate the policy arena is a feature of both periods.

Accountability for Rationing — Theory into Practice

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 660-668 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Newdick
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
National Health ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
The Public ◽  
Modern Health Care ◽  
Concept Of Health ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
Health Need

Most now recognize the inevitability of rationing in modern health care systems. The elastic nature of the concept of “health need,” our natural human sympathy for those in distress, the increased range of conditions for which treatment is available, the “greying” of the population; all expand demand for care in ways that exceed the supply of resources to provide it. UK governments, however, have found this truth difficult to present and have not encouraged open and candid public debate about choices in health care. Indeed, successive governments have presented the opposite view, that “if you are ill or injured there will be a national health service there to help; and access to it will be based on need and need alone.” And they have been rightly criticized for misleading the public and then blaming clinical and managerial staffin the National Health Service (NHS) when expectations have been disappointed.

The Beveridge Report and the Implementation of the Welfare State

2018 ◽  
pp. 260-285
Author(s):  
George R. Boyer
Keyword(s):  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Universal Coverage ◽  
Social Welfare Policy ◽  
Economic Insecurity ◽  
The Public ◽  
Welfare Reforms ◽  
The Welfare State

This chapter explores the story of the 1942 Beveridge Report and the beginnings of the welfare state. The policies proposed by Beveridge and the 1945–48 legislation were logical extensions of government's expanding role in social welfare policy beginning with the Liberal Welfare Reforms. This does not mean that the importance of the postwar legislation should be downplayed. Because of the adoption of the National Health Service, universal coverage, and equality of treatment, Britain after 1948 deserves to be called a welfare state, while Edwardian and interwar Britain do not. Unfortunately, despite the enthusiasm with which the public greeted the welfare state, the postwar policies did not eliminate economic insecurity.

scholarly journals A closer look at how managerial support can help improve patient experience: Insights from the UK’s National Health Service

2020 ◽  
pp. 001872672093883
Author(s):  
Chidiebere Ogbonnaya ◽  
Mayowa T Babalola
Keyword(s):  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Patient Experience ◽  
National Health ◽  
Organizational Support ◽  
Quality Of Healthcare ◽  
Perceived Supervisor Support ◽  
Managerial Support

Recent debates in healthcare have emphasized the need for more respectful and responsive services that meet patients’ preferences. These debates centre on patient experience, one of the most critical factors for measuring healthcare performance. In exploring the relevance of patient experience key questions need answers: what can managers or supervisors do to help improve the quality of healthcare? What is the role of employees? Addressing these questions, this study examines whether perceived supervisor support (PSS) promotes patient experience through a serial mediation involving perceived organizational support (POS), and positive employee outcomes such as engagement, involvement and advocacy. Using two-wave data from the British National Health Service, we show that PSS is strongly associated with POS, which in turn improves engagement, involvement and advocacy among employees. PSS also has a positive indirect influence on patient experience through POS and advocacy; but the indirect paths involving engagement and involvement are not supported. We offer useful guidance on how healthcare employers can support employees towards improving the quality of services rendered to patients.

DOZ047.115: Quality and readability of esophageal atresia information on the Internet

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
B R O’Connor ◽  
E Doherty ◽  
F Friedmacher ◽  
L Vernon ◽  
T S Paran
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Atresia ◽  
Oesophageal Atresia ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Search Term ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
Ease Score ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Google Search

Abstract Introduction Increasingly in pediatric surgical practice, patients, their parents, and surgeons alike use the Internet as an easily and quickly accessible source of information about conditions and their treatment. The quality and reliability of this information may often be unregulated. We aim to objectively assess the online information available relating to esophageal atresia and its management. Methods We performed searches for ‘oesophageal atresia’ and ‘esophageal atresia’ using the Google, Yahoo, and Bing engines to encompass both European and American spellings. We assessed the first 20 results of each search and excluded duplicates or unrelated pages. The DISCERN score and the Health on the Net Foundation Code (HONcode) toolbar were utilized to assess the quality of information on each website. We evaluated readability with the Flesch reading ease (FRE) and the Flesch–Kincaid grade (FKG). Results Of the original 120 hits, 61 were excluded (51 duplicates, 10 unrelated). Out of 59 individual sites reviewed, only 13 sites were HONcode approved. The mean overall DISCERN score was 52.55 (range: 22–78). The mean DISCERN score for the search term ‘oesphageal atresia’ was 57 (range: 22–78) in comparison to 59.03 for ‘esophageal atresia’ (range: 27–78). Google search had the lowest overall mean DISCERN score at 54.83 (range: 35–78), followed by Yahoo at 58.03 (range: 22–78), and Bing with the highest overall mean score of 61.2 (range: 27–78). The majority of websites were graded excellent (≥63) or good (51–62), 43% and 27%, respectively; 20% were scored as fair (39–50), with 10% being either poor (27–38) or very poor (≤26). In terms of readability, the overall Flesch Reading Ease score was 33.02, and the overall Flesch–Kincaid grade level was 10.3. Conclusions The quality of freely available online information relating to esophageal atresia is generally good but may not be accessible to everyone due to being relatively difficult to read. We should direct parents towards comprehensive, high-quality, and easily readable information sources should they wish to supplement their knowledge about esophageal atresia and its management.

scholarly journals P126 An analysis of the quality and readability of online information for osteoarthritis

Rheumatology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kieran Murray ◽  
Timothy Murray ◽  
Candice Low ◽  
Anna O'Rourke ◽  
Douglas J Veale
Keyword(s):  
Grade Level ◽  
English Language ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
12Th Grade ◽  
8Th Grade ◽  
Ease Score

Abstract Background Osteoarthritis is the most common cause of disability in people over 65 years old. The readability of of online osteoarthritis information has never been assessed. A 2003 study found the quality of online osteoarthritis information to be poor. This study reviews the quality of online information regarding osteoarthritis in 2018 using three validated scoring systems. Readability is reviewed for the first time, again using three validated tools. Methods The term osteoarthritis was searched across the three most popular English language search engines. The first 25 pages from each search engine were analysed. Duplicate pages, websites featuring paid advertisements, inaccessible pages (behind a pay wall, not available for geographical reasons) and non-text pages were excluded. Readability was measured using Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Gunning-Fog Index (GFI). Website quality was scored using the the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria and DISCERN criteria. Presence or absence of HONcode certification, age of content, content producer and author characteristics were noted. Results 37 unique websites were suitable for analysis. Readability varied by assessment tool from 8th to 12th grade level. This compares with the recommended 7- 8th grade level. One (2.7%) website met all four JAMA Criteria. Mean DISCERN quality of information for OA websites was “fair”, comparing favourably with the “poor” grading of a 2003 study. HONCode endorsed websites (43.2%) were of a statistically significantly higher quality. Conclusion Quality of online health information for OA is “fair”. 2.7% of websites met JAMA benchmark criteria for quality. Readability was equal to or more difficult than recommendations. HONcode certification was indicative of higher quality, but not readability. Disclosures K. Murray None. T. Murray None. C. Low None. A. O'Rourke None. D.J. Veale None.

scholarly journals Guardians of public interest: the expectation and experience of non-executive directors in National Health Service commissioning boards in England

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joy Tweed ◽  
Louise M. Wallace
Keyword(s):  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
National Health ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Open Systems ◽  
Executive Directors ◽  
Goal Model ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
Systems Model

PurposeThe purpose of the study is to examine how Non-Executive Directors (NEDs) in the English National Health Service (NHS) commissioning bodies experienced their role and contribution to governance.Design/methodology/approachSemi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 31 NEDs of Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) and 8 Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) NEDs. Framework analysis was applied using a conceptualisation of governance developed by Newman, which has four models of governance: the hierarchy, self-governance, open systems and rational goal model.FindingsNEDs saw themselves as guardians of the public interest. NEDs’ power is a product of the explicit levers set out in the constitution of the board, but also how they choose to use their knowledge and expertise to influence decisions for, as they see it, the public good. They contribute to governance by holding to account executive and professional colleagues, acting largely within the rational goal model. CCG NEDs felt less powerful than in those in PCTs, operating largely in conformance and representational roles, even though government policy appears to be moving towards a more networked, open systems model.Originality/valueThis is the first in-depth study of NEDs in English NHS local commissioning bodies. It is of value in helping to inform how the NED role could be enhanced to make a wider contribution to healthcare leadership as new systems are established in the UK and beyond.

scholarly journals DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF QUALITY OF INFORMATION OF DRUGS ON ANDROID-BASED INDIAN ONLINE PHARMACY APPLICATIONS: A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS

2020 ◽  
pp. 93-96
Author(s):  
SHAIKH SANA PERVEEN ◽  
SHWETA SURVE ◽  
NERURKAR RP
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
Flesch Reading Ease ◽  
Android Apps ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Online Pharmacy ◽  
Barriers To Access ◽  
Ease Score

Objectives: The objectives of the study were as follows: 1) To analyze the completeness of drug-related information of various Indian pharmacy online android applications and its readability. 2)To analyze the ease of availability of drugs and barriers to access them on these apps. Methods: A total of five popular pharmacy android apps in India (1mg, Netmeds, MedPlus, Pharmeasy, and Medikova) were chosen to analyze the prescribing information (PI) regarding five drugs, metformin, atenolol, ranitidine, ibuprofen, and alprazolam. Display of PI in these apps was compared with standard sources, i.e., National Formulary of India, Current Index of Medical Specialties, and package inserts of respective drugs. Drug-related information under 11 categories (indication, dose, contraindications, adverse events, etc.) was analyzed in these apps as complete/ incomplete. Readability of information was assessed using Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES). These five drugs were ordered from all the apps to know the exact process to access them. Results: Categories such as indication and dose were mentioned in most apps. While, precautions and adverse events were given for few drugs in few apps. Least score was for categories like precautions in special population. FRES was minimum in Pharmeasy (30.82) and maximum in MedPlus (70.51). Valid prescriptions were demanded by all apps while one app had the facility of providing prescription from their own consultant. Only one app provided “Ask a Pharmacist” option. Conclusion: We found lots of inconsistency in the information provided by these apps. Our results are based on only five apps and provide a framework for future studies to scrutinize online apps.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document