MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3180380509 · doi:10.1097/prs.0000000000008164

Facial Paralysis Online Educational Resources: Readability and Benefit to Patient Education

2021· editorial· en· W3180380509 sur OpenAlexaff
Mithila Somasundaram, Christine B. Novak, Ronald M. Zuker, Gregory H. Borschel

Notice bibliographique

RevuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2021
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueFacial Nerve Paralysis Treatment and Research
Établissements canadiensHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids FoundationUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésReadabilityMedicinePalsyFacial paralysisReading (process)Bell PalsyComprehensionHealth literacyParalysisAudiologyMedical educationHealth careBell's palsySurgeryAlternative medicineLinguisticsPathology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Increasing numbers of persons rely on the internet for medical information.1 Patients with facial paralysis are presented with many complex management options, and the terminology related to facial paralysis and treatments can be complex.2 Patient decision-making requires good comprehension of medical information. With reported high rates of low health literacy, it is essential to adhere to the minimum recommended standard of a grade 6 reading level for educational resources.3,4 We evaluated the readability of online education resources related to facial nerve disorders published by medical institutions, health systems, professional organizations, and governments. An internet search was performed using the terms “Moebius syndrome,” “facial palsy,” “facial paralysis,” and “Bell’s palsy” and included websites that (1) presented educational information in English about the diagnosis, assessment, and/or treatment and (2) were published by health care and educational institutions, medical associations/societies, or governments. The Flesch-Kincaid grade level and Flesch reading ease scores were assessed for each webpage (acceptable recommendations: Flesch-Kincaid grade level <6.0, Flesch reading ease score >80.0). Our search, conducted in April of 2020, retrieved 78 webpages with the terms “Moebius syndrome” (n = 7) and “facial palsy,” “facial paralysis,” and “Bell’s palsy” (n = 71). Most pages failed to meet the recommended standards, with mean Flesch-Kincaid grade levels above 6.0 and mean Flesch reading ease scores below 80.0. The grade 6 reading level was rare among the websites searched (“facial palsy,” “facial paralysis,” and “Bell’s palsy,” n = 5; “Moebius syndrome,” n = 0). The mean reading ease score of the “Moebius syndrome” websites was significantly lower (p = 0.01) compared to the scores of the “facial palsy,” “facial paralysis,” and “Bell’s palsy” websites (Table 1). Health system websites demonstrated significantly lower mean reading ease scores (p = 0.02) and greater mean Flesch-Kincaid grade levels (p = 0.01) compared to other organization types (Fig. 1). Table 1. - Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level and Flesch Reading Ease Score with Search Terms Search Term “Moebius Syndrome” Search Terms “Facial Palsy,” “Facial Paralysis,” “Bell’s Palsy” p Flesch-Kincaid grade level,* mean ± SD 11.2 ± 1.8 9.8 ± 2.4 0.33 Flesch reading ease,† mean ± SD 41.4 ± 9.8 54.8 ± 12.3 0.01 *Flesch-Kincaid grade level indicates the reading difficulty based on grade level. Recommended, <grade 6.†Flesch reading ease score indicates the level of “ease” to read text (100-point scale, with higher scores indicated easier to read). Recommended, >80.0. Fig. 1.: Comparison of readability metrics and source of online resource. Websites from health systems demonstrated significantly lower mean reading ease scores (p = 0.02) and greater mean Flesch-Kincaid grade level (p = 0.01) compared to medical society and government websites.Our study found that most online educational resources on facial nerve disorders published by hospital/health systems, education institutions, medical societies, and governments failed to meet the recommended grade 6 reading level. This is particularly important in conditions related to facial nerve dysfunction, which are complex and may be challenging to comprehend. Patient education is an essential component of medical and surgical care. Online resources should be written at the recommended reading level to ensure that patients seeking information related to facial paralysis can better understand this information. Studies evaluating the readability of online educational resources on other topics related to plastic and reconstructive surgery report similar results and highlight the potential for reduced comprehension of these online resources.4,5 A limitation of our study was English-language restriction and the target audiences for the websites. Some websites reviewed were targeted to provide information to medical professionals and patients. Resources directed toward medical specialists may include complex medical and anatomic terms that may inflate the readability statistics. Most online education resources related to facial nerve disorders fail to meet readability standards and highlight a common problem related to online surgical resources for patients and their families. To ensure and promote better health education, medical professionals, website content designers, and writers should adhere to the recommended standards for readability to maximize patient comprehension. DISCLOSURE The authors have no financial interest to declare in relation to the content of this article.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,621
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,011
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,300
Écart entre enseignants0,283 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations7
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePlastic & Reconstructive SurgeryMême sujetFacial Nerve Paralysis Treatment and ResearchTravaux en français237 207