Reading Grade Level of Plan B Instructions and Patient Information Materials on Emergency Contraception
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Plan B recently became a schedule III product in Canada. Patients can now access Plan B without a pharmacist consult and may rely only on the packaging information provided to learn about the medication. It is recommended that health information materials directed at patients be written at or below a grade 8 level. We assessed the reading grade level of the Plan B packaging information and of patient information materials on Plan B and emergency contraception. Methods: Plan B packaging information was obtained from the manufacturer, and a convenience sample of 10 patient information materials on Plan B and emergency contraception were collected from pharmacies and clinics in Edmonton, Alberta, and from Canadian websites. The Fry graph and SMOG formula were used to measure readability of the materials. Results: The Plan B packaging information had a mean reading grade level of 12.8. The mean reading grade level of patient information materials was 12.9 for print materials and 13.4 for online materials. Conclusions: Plan B packaging information and patient information materials relating to Plan B and emergency contraception are written at reading grade levels beyond the recommendations for patient health literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".