Computerized versus hand-scored health literacy tools: a comparison of Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) and Flesch-Kincaid in printed patient education materials.

Objective: The research compared and contrasted hand-scoring and computerized methods of evaluating the grade level of patient education materials that are distributed at an academic medical center in east Tennessee and sought to determine if these materials adhered to the American Medical Associati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Journal of the Medical Library Association Vol. 106; no. 1; pp. 38 - 46
Autores principales: Grabeel, Kelsey Leonard, Russomanno, Jennifer, Oelschlegel, Sandy, Tester, Emily, Heidel, Robert Eric
Formato: research tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: University of Pittsburgh, University Library System Jan2018
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=127288393&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 127288393
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        15365050
        PI8
      jtl: Journal of the Medical Library Association
      issn: 15365050
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jan2018
      vid: 106
      iid: 1
      pid: 60406
      pub: University of Pittsburgh, University Library System
      place: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    artinfo:
      ui:
        127288393
        127288393
        127288393
        10.5195/jmla.2018.262
        127288393
      ppf: 38
      ppct: 8
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Computerized versus hand-scored health literacy tools: a comparison of Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) and Flesch-Kincaid in printed patient education materials.
      aug:
        au:
          Grabeel, Kelsey Leonard
          Russomanno, Jennifer
          Oelschlegel, Sandy
          Tester, Emily
          Heidel, Robert Eric
        affil: Assistant Director of the Health Information Center, Preston Medical Library/Health Information Center, University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine/University of Tennessee Medical Center, Knoxville, TN
      sug:
        subj:
          Readability Evaluation
          Patient Education
          Academic Medical Centers Tennessee
          Human
          Health Literacy
          Clinical Assessment Tools
          Tennessee
      ab: Objective: The research compared and contrasted hand-scoring and computerized methods of evaluating the grade level of patient education materials that are distributed at an academic medical center in east Tennessee and sought to determine if these materials adhered to the American Medical Association's (AMA's) recommended reading level of sixth grade. Methods: Librarians at an academic medical center located in the heart of Appalachian Tennessee initiated the assessment of 150 of the most used printed patient education materials. Based on the Flesch-Kincaid (F-K) scoring rubric, 2 of the 150 documents were excluded from statistical comparisons due to the absence of text (images only). Researchers assessed the remaining 148 documents using the hand-scored Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) method and the computerized F-K grade level method. For SMOG, 3 independent reviewers hand-scored each of the 150 documents. For F-K, documents were analyzed using Microsoft Word. Reading grade levels scores were entered into a database for statistical analysis. Inter-rater reliability was calculated using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC). Paired t-tests were used to compare readability means. Results: Acceptable inter-rater reliability was found for SMOG (ICC=0.95). For the 148 documents assessed, SMOG produced a significantly higher mean reading grade level (M=9.6, SD=1.3) than F-K (M=6.5, SD=1.3; p<0.001). Additionally, when using the SMOG method of assessment, 147 of the 148 documents (99.3%) scored above the AMA's recommended reading level of sixth grade. Conclusions: Computerized health literacy assessment tools, used by many national patient education material providers, might not be representative of the actual reading grade levels of patient education materials. This is problematic in regions like Appalachia because materials may not be comprehensible to the area's low-literacy patients. Medical librarians have the potential to advance their role in patient education to better serve their patient populations.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N