Research briefs reading grade level and readability of printed cancer education materials
- PMID: 12949600
- DOI: 10.1188/03.ONF.867-870
Research briefs reading grade level and readability of printed cancer education materials
Abstract
Purpose/objectives: To analyze cancer brochures to estimate their reading level and assess their readability.
Design: Quantitative.
Sample: 10 cancer brochures published by various cancer organizations.
Methods: SMOG was used to estimate reading grade level of the brochures; the Readability Assessment Instrument (RAIN) was used to analyze the brochures in terms of 14 variables that affect comprehension. Interrater reliability was computed for reading grade level and readability level.
Main research variables: Reading grade level and readability.
Findings: Reading grade level of the brochures ranged from 9-15. The RAIN analysis showed that the number of variables incorporated across the 10 brochures ranged from 12-14, and the number of variables reaching readability criteria ranged from 6-8.
Conclusions: Cancer education materials are written at levels that may be too high for the average reader. These materials also may be difficult to understand because of the way they are written. Materials need to be written so that they match the reading levels of patients with cancer and the general public and incorporate more of the variables that affect comprehension so that readers can understand them easily.
Implications for nursing: Nurses use written education materials to inform patients about their cancer diagnoses. They can conduct a comprehensive analysis of cancer brochures using SMOG and RAIN and then, if needed, use this information to revise the brochures so that they can be understood easily. If possible, patients who are going to be using the materials should be involved in the revision process.
Similar articles
-
Readability of the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry patient education materials.Pediatr Dent. 2007 Sep-Oct;29(5):431-5. Pediatr Dent. 2007. PMID: 18027780
-
Patient literacy and the readability of written cancer educational materials.Oncol Nurs Forum. 1995 Oct;22(9):1345-51. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1995. PMID: 8539175
-
The readability of American Academy of Pediatrics patient education brochures.J Pediatr Health Care. 2005 May-Jun;19(3):151-6. doi: 10.1016/j.pedhc.2005.01.013. J Pediatr Health Care. 2005. PMID: 15867830
-
Writing and designing readable patient education materials.Nephrol Nurs J. 2004 Jul-Aug;31(4):373-7. Nephrol Nurs J. 2004. PMID: 15453229 Review.
-
The gap between patient reading comprehension and the readability of patient education materials.J Fam Pract. 1990 Nov;31(5):533-8. J Fam Pract. 1990. PMID: 2230677 Review.
Cited by
-
Understandability of Patient Information Booklets for Patients with Cancer.J Cancer Educ. 2018 Jun;33(3):517-527. doi: 10.1007/s13187-016-1121-3. J Cancer Educ. 2018. PMID: 27726109
-
Evaluating the Effect of a Video Education Curriculum for First Time Breast Cancer Patients: a Prospective RCT Feasibility Study.J Cancer Educ. 2019 Dec;34(6):1234-1240. doi: 10.1007/s13187-019-01578-3. J Cancer Educ. 2019. PMID: 31359374 Clinical Trial.
-
Computer-Based Readability Testing of Information Booklets for German Cancer Patients.J Cancer Educ. 2019 Aug;34(4):696-704. doi: 10.1007/s13187-018-1358-0. J Cancer Educ. 2019. PMID: 29651761
-
Development and Formative Assessment of the Hearing Loss Toolkit for Self-Management.Semin Hear. 2019 Feb;40(1):49-67. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1676783. Epub 2019 Feb 5. Semin Hear. 2019. PMID: 30728649 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comprehension of Health-related Written Materials by Older Adults.Educ Gerontol. 2009;35(7):653-668. doi: 10.1080/03601270902885504. Educ Gerontol. 2009. PMID: 19543546 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources