MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405739565 · doi:10.1016/j.pecinn.2024.100368

Assessing the language availability, readability, suitability and comprehensibility of heat-health messaging content on health authority webpages and online resources in Canada

2024· article· en· W4405739565 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Emily J. Tetzlaff, Kristina‐Marie T. Janetos, Katie E. Wagar, Farah Mourad, Melissa Gorman, Victor Gallant, Glen P. Kenny

Bibliographic record

VenuePEC Innovation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalHealth CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsReadabilityWorld Wide WebComputer scienceWeb pageMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heat-health communication initiatives are a key public health protection strategy. Therefore, understanding the potential challenges that all Canadians and specific groups, such as those facing literacy barriers and non-native language speakers, may experience in accessing or interpreting information, is critical. This study reviewed and evaluated the language availability, readability, suitability, and comprehensibility of heat-related webpages and online resources ( n = 417) published on public health authority websites in Canada ( n = 73). Six validated readability scales and a comprehensibility instrument were used. Most content was presented in English (90 %); however, only 7 % of the online resources were available in more than one language. The average reading grade level of the content (grade 8) exceeded the recommended level (grade 6), and only 22 % of the content was deemed superior for suitability and comprehensibility. Our study evaluating web-based materials about extreme heat published by Canadian health authorities provides evidence that the current language availability, readability, suitability, and comprehensibility may be limiting the capacity for members of the public to discern key messaging. To ensure all Canadians can access and interpret information related to heat-health protection, public health authorities may consider translating their materials into additional languages and incorporating a readability evaluation to improve public understanding. • Heat events are public health emergencies that impact those with literacy barriers. • Heat-health communication initiatives are a key public health protection strategy. • The average reading grade level of the content exceeded the recommended level. • The current readability may limit the public's ability to discern key messaging. • Health authorities may consider translating their materials into more languages.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEC InnovationSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207