Readability, suitability, and writing for clients with limited literacy skills
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary This study evaluated 56 documents developed by 11 nonprofit and public social service agencies to provide information to clients. The author used the Flesch Reading Ease, Simple Measure of Goobledegook (SMOG), and Gunning Fog Index formulas to assess reading grade levels and the Suitability Assessment of Material to evaluate overall suitability for readers with limited literacy skills. Findings All documents but one were above the recommended fifth grade level for low-literacy materials. Suitability Assessment of Material scores indicated 44.6% ( n = 26) were not appropriately formatted for readers with limited literacy skills. Applications Findings suggest a need for improving social service agencies’ and practitioners’ knowledge and awareness of the importance of assessing the readability and suitability of print materials, especially those intended for clients.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it