International Journal of Medical Informatics
Volume 79, Issue 6 , Pages 438-449 , June 2010

The influence of text characteristics on perceived and actual difficulty of health information

  • Gondy Leroy

      Affiliations

    • School of Information Systems and Technology, Claremont Graduate University, 130 E. Ninth Street, Claremont, CA 91711, United States
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +1 909 607 3270.
    • ,
  • Stephen Helmreich

      Affiliations

    • Department of Information Sciences and Security Systems, Physical Science Laboratory, New Mexico State University, United States
    • ,
  • James R. Cowie

      Affiliations

    • Department of Psychology, New Mexico State University, United States

Received 11 November 2009 ,Revised 20 January 2010 ,Accepted 5 February 2010.

References 

  1. Committee on Health Literacy—Institute of Medicine of the National Academies . In:  Nielsen-Bohlman N,  Panzer AM,  Kindig DA editor. Health Literacy: A Prescription to End Confusion. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2004;
  2. Friedland RB. Understanding Health Literacy: New Estimates of the Costs of Inadequate Health Literacy, Washington, DC. 1998;
  3. Kandula NR, Nsiah-Kumi PA, Makoul R, Sager J, Zei CP, Glass S, et al. The relationship between health literacy and knowledge improvement after a Multimedia Type 2 Diabetes Education Program. Patient Educ. Couns. 2009;75(3):321–327
  4. von Wagner C, Semmler C, Good A, Wardle J. Health literacy and self-efficacy for participating in colorectal cancer screening: the role of information processing. Patient Educ. Couns. 2009;75(3):352–357
  5. Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, Algazy JI, Kravitz RL, Broder MS, et al. Health information on the Internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA. 2001;285:2612–2621
  6. D’Alessandro D, Kingsley P, Johnson-West J. The readability of pediatric patient education materials on the World Wide Web. Arch. Pediatr. Adolesc. Med. 2001;155:807–812
  7. Root J, Stableford S. Easy-to-read consumer communications: a missing link in Medicaid managed care. J. Health Polit. Policy Law. 1999;24:1–26
  8. Tokuda Y, Doba N, Butler JP, Paasche-Orlow MK. Health literacy and physical and psychological wellbeing in Japanese adults. Patient Educ. Couns. 2009;75(3):411–417
  9. Weis BD. Health Literacy and Patient Safety: Help Patients Understand. Manual for Clinicians. second edition. AMA and AMA Foundation; 2007;
  10. Baker L, Wagner TH, Signer S, Bundorf MK. Use of the Internet and e-mail for health care information: results from a National Survey. JAMA. 2003;289:2400–2406
  11. Davis TC, Dolan NC, Ferreira MR, Tomori C, Green KW, Sipler AM, et al. The role of inadequate health literacy skills in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Invest. 2001;19:193–200
  12. Janz NK, Becker MH. The health belief model: a decade later. Health Educ. Quart. 1984;11:1–47
  13. Velayo RS. Retention of content as a function of presentation mode and perceived difficulty. Reading Improv. 1993;30:216–227
  14. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1988;50:179–211
  15. Trafimow D, Sheeran P, Conner M, Finlay KA. Evidence that perceived behavioral control is a multidimensional construct: perceived control and perceived difficulty. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 2002;41:101–121
  16. Liu Y, Doucette WR, Farris KB. Perceived difficulty and self-efficacy in the factor structure of perceived behavioral control to seek drug information from physicians and pharmacists. Res. Social Adm. Pharm. 2007;3:145–159
  17. W.H. DuBay, The principles of readability: impact information, http://www.impact-information.com/impactinfo/readability02.pdf, 2004.
  18. Bluman E, Foley R, Chiodo C. Readability of the patient education section of the AOFAS website. Foot Ankle Int. 2009;30:287–291
  19. Cheung W, Pond G, Heslegrave R, Enright K, Potanina L, Siu L. The contents and readability of informed consent forms for oncology clinical trials. Am. J. Clin. Oncol. 2009;(Epub ahead of print)
  20. Greywoode J, Bluman E, Spiegel J, Boon M. Readability analysis of patient information on the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Website. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2009;141:555–558
  21. Bernstam EV, Shelton DM, Walji M, Meric-Bernstam F. Instruments to assess the quality of health information on the World Wide Web: what can our patients actually use?. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2005;74:13–19
  22. Friedman D, Hoffman-Goetz L, Arocha J. Readability of cancer information on the Internet. J. Cancer Educ. 2004;19:117–122
  23. Kusec S, Brborovic O, Schillinger D. Diabetes websites accredited by the Health On the Net Foundation Code of Conduct: readable or not?. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2003;95:
  24. Leroy G, Helmreich S, Cowie JR, Miller T, Zheng W. Evaluating Online Health Information: Beyond Readability Formulas. Washington, DC: AMIA; 2008;
  25. Leroy G, Miller T, Rosemblat G, Browne A. A balanced approach to health information evaluation: a vocabulary-based naïve Bayes classifier and readability formulas. J. Am. Soc. Inform. Sci. 2008;59:1409–1419Published online: April 28, 2008
  26. Hunter JL. Cervical cancer educational pamphlets: do they miss the mark for Mexican immigrant women's needs?. Cancer Control. 2005;12:42–50
  27. Khazaal Y, Chatton A, Cochand S, Coquard O, Fernandez S, Khan R, et al. Brief DISCERN, six questions for the evaluation of evidence-based content of health-related websites. Patient Educ. Couns. 2009;77(1):33–37
  28. Birru MS, Steinman RA. Online health information and low-literacy African Americans. J. Med. Internet Res. 2004;6:e26
  29. Hirsh D, Clerehan R, Staples M, Osborne RH, Buchbinder R. Patient assessment of medication information leaflets and validation of the evaluative linguistic framework (ELF). Patient Educ. Couns. 2009;77(2):248–254
  30. Taylor WL. Cloze procedure: a new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quart. 1953;30:415–433
  31. Trifiletti LB, Shields WC, McDonald EM, Walker AR, Gielen AC. Development of injury prevention materials for people with low literacy skills. Patient Educ. Couns. 2006;64(1–3):119–127
  32. Weaver ICA, Renken A. Applied psychology of readability. Int. Encyclopedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2004;12789–12791
  33. Mazor K, Dodd K, Kunches L. Communicating hospital infection data to the public: a study of consumer responses and preferences. Am. J. Med. Qual. 2009;24:108–115
  34. Birru MS, Monaco VM, Charles L, Drew H, Njie V, Bierria T, et al. Internet usage by low-literacy adults seeking health information: an observational analysis. J. Med. Internet Res. 2004;6:e25
  35. Wang Y, Liu Z. Automatic detecting indicators for quality of health information on the web. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2007;76:575–582
  36. Yan X, Song D, Li X. Concept-based document readability in domain specific information retrieval. In: Proceedings of the 15th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. ACM, Arlington, VA, USA. 2006;
  37. Provost M, Koompalum D, Dong D, Marti BC. The initial development of the WebMedQual Scale: domain assessment of the construct of quality of health web sites. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2006;75:42–57
  38. Bernstam E, Sagaram S, Walji M, Johnson C, Meric-Bernstam F. Usability of quality measures for online health information: can commonly used technical quality criteria be reliably assessed?. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2005;74:675–683
  39. Kandula S, Zeng-Treitler Q. Creating a gold standard for the readability measurement of health texts. In: AMIA 2008 Fall Symposium. Washington, DC. 2008;p. 353–357
  40. Leroy G, Helmreich S, Cowie JR. The effects of linguistic features and evaluation perspective on perceived difficulty of medical text. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). Kauai. 2010;

PII: S1386-5056(10)00041-9

doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2010.02.002

International Journal of Medical Informatics
Volume 79, Issue 6 , Pages 438-449 , June 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution