Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2003 Apr 30;31(7):409-14.
doi: 10.1016/s0212-6567(03)79199-9.

[Can patients read what we want them to read? Analysis of the readability of printed materials for health education]

[Article in Spanish]
I M Barrio Cantalejo  1 , P Simón Lorda
Affiliations

[Can patients read what we want them to read? Analysis of the readability of printed materials for health education]

[Article in Spanish]
I M Barrio Cantalejo et al. Aten Primaria. .

Abstract
in English, Spanish

Objective: To analyze readability and legibility of a systematic sample of health education materials made available at a health center, and to propose recommendations for improvement.

Design: Observational, descriptive study.

Setting: An urban health center in Madrid, Spain.

Material: A sample of text from 326 health education documents.

Main measures: The 326 texts were classified according to target reader, organism responsible for publication, topic, and date of publication. A sample of 500 words from each document was analyzed with Microsoft Word 2000 to determine the Flesch readability score and sentence complexity index, and to calculate the INLEG index. Print size and accompanying graphics were also analyzed.

Results: Readability of the materials was generally acceptable, with a mean Flesch score of 13.56. However, the type tended to be too small (mean 11.37 points). In 32% of the documents there were no illustrations, and no date of publication was given in 46%. CONCLUSIONS. The readability and legibility in the group of documents we analyzed could both be improved by following the recommendations offered here. Further research is needed on the techniques used to analyze readability and legibility, especially with regard to the latter.

Objetivo: Analizar la legibilidad lingüística formal y la legibilidad tipográfica de una muestra sistemática de folletos de educación para la salud disponibles en un centro de salud y proponer recomendaciones para mejorarlas.

Diseño: Estudio observacional, descriptivo.

Emplazamiento: Un centro de salud urbano de Madrid.

Material: Una muestra de texto de 326 folletos de EPS.

Mediciones principales: Los 326 textos fueron clasificados según el destinatario, la entidad patrocinadora y temática, y la existencia de fecha de edición. Se analizó una muestra de 500 palabras de cada folleto con el programa Microsoft Word 2000, para determinar su puntuación de Flesch y el índice de complejidad oracional y estimar el índice LEGIN. Se analizó el tamaño de la letra y la presencia de imágenes informativas.

Resultados: Los folletos presentan una legibilidad lingüística de conjunto aceptable, con una media de puntuación de Flesch de 13,56, pero tienden a escribirse con letra pequeña, con un tamaño medio de 11,37. En un 32% no había imágenes informativas y un 46% no tenía fecha de edición.

Conclusiones: El grupo de folletos analizados muestra una legibilidad lingüística y tipográfica que es muy mejorable siguiendo las recomendaciones que se proponen. Es preciso seguir investigando en las técnicas de análisis de la legibilidad, especialmente de la legibilidad tipográfica.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Smith T. Information for patients: Writing simple English is difficult, even for doctors. BMJ. 1992;305:1242. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ford S., Schofield T., Hope T. Barniers to the evidence-based patient choice (EBPC) consultation. Patient Education Counseling. 2002;47(2):179–185. - PubMed
    1. Alliende González F. La legibilidad de los textos. Andrés Bello; Santiago de Chile: 1994. p. 24.
    1. Merritt S., Gates M.A., Skiba K. Readability levels of selected hypercholesterolemia patient education literature. Heart & Lung. 1993;22:415–420. - PubMed
    1. Valaitis R.K., Shea E. An evaluation of breastfeeding promotion literature: Does it really promote breastfeeding? Can J Public Health. 1993;84:24–27. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources