How readable and reliable is online patient information on chronic rhinosinusitis?
ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the quality and readability of websites on chronic rhinosinusitis.MethodsA total of 180 results from 3 different search engines regarding ‘chronic rhinosinusitis’, ‘sinusitis’ and ‘sinus infections’ were analysed for readability using the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Leve...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of laryngology and otology 2021-07, Vol.135 (7), p.644-647 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 647 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | 644 |
| container_title | Journal of laryngology and otology |
| container_volume | 135 |
| creator | Habeeb, A |
| description | ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the quality and readability of websites on chronic rhinosinusitis.MethodsA total of 180 results from 3 different search engines regarding ‘chronic rhinosinusitis’, ‘sinusitis’ and ‘sinus infections’ were analysed for readability using the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease Score and Gunning Fog Index. The Discern tool was used to approximate information quality.ResultsFrom 180 total searches, 69 unique websites were identified. These had an average Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level of 9.75 (95 per cent confidence interval = 9.12–10.4), a Flesch Reading Ease Score of 45.0 (41.0–49.0) and a Gunning Fog Index of 13.7 (12.9–14.4), which equates to the average reading level of a college or university student. Discern scores were variable but consistently showed good-quality information.ConclusionChronic rhinosinusitis information is of a high quality but is for a reading level higher than that of the average adult. Standardising patient information should ensure adequate comprehension and improve patient compliance. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S0022215121001559 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2544162681</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0022215121001559</cupid><sourcerecordid>2550600254</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c350t-13237eb8804a1330fb6fb888df852e4007fcc55315b6af9ddfc7c8fe586f42bd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEtLAzEUhYMoWB8_wN2AGzejN89JVyJFrVAQfKyHTCaxKTNJTWYQ_72pLQiKq8vhfOdwOQidYbjEgKurZwBCCOaYYADM-XQPTXDFZMmZgH002djlxj9ERymtIEMVkAl6moePIhrVqqYzhfJtFp37Fi4VwXfOm2KtBmf8UDhvQ-yzCD5bhV7G4J0u4tL5kJwfkxtcuj5BB1Z1yZzu7jF6vbt9mc3LxeP9w-xmUWrKYSgxJbQyjZTAFKYUbCNsVrK1khPDACqrNecU80YoO21bqystreFSWEaalh6ji23vOob30aSh7l3SpuuUN2FMNeGMYUGExBk9_4Wuwhh9_i5THEReh7NM4S2lY0gpGluvo-tV_Kwx1JuV6z8r5wzdZVTfRNe-mZ_q_1NfMxl-Ig</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2550600254</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How readable and reliable is online patient information on chronic rhinosinusitis?</title><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Habeeb, A</creator><creatorcontrib>Habeeb, A</creatorcontrib><description>ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the quality and readability of websites on chronic rhinosinusitis.MethodsA total of 180 results from 3 different search engines regarding ‘chronic rhinosinusitis’, ‘sinusitis’ and ‘sinus infections’ were analysed for readability using the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease Score and Gunning Fog Index. The Discern tool was used to approximate information quality.ResultsFrom 180 total searches, 69 unique websites were identified. These had an average Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level of 9.75 (95 per cent confidence interval = 9.12–10.4), a Flesch Reading Ease Score of 45.0 (41.0–49.0) and a Gunning Fog Index of 13.7 (12.9–14.4), which equates to the average reading level of a college or university student. Discern scores were variable but consistently showed good-quality information.ConclusionChronic rhinosinusitis information is of a high quality but is for a reading level higher than that of the average adult. Standardising patient information should ensure adequate comprehension and improve patient compliance.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-2151</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1748-5460</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0022215121001559</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Confidence intervals ; Main Articles ; Patients ; Polyps ; Readability ; Reading ; Rhinitis ; Rhinosinusitis ; Search engines ; Search strategies ; Sinus ; Sinusitis ; University graduates ; University students ; Websites</subject><ispartof>Journal of laryngology and otology, 2021-07, Vol.135 (7), p.644-647</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c350t-13237eb8804a1330fb6fb888df852e4007fcc55315b6af9ddfc7c8fe586f42bd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c350t-13237eb8804a1330fb6fb888df852e4007fcc55315b6af9ddfc7c8fe586f42bd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022215121001559/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,27915,27916,55619</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Habeeb, A</creatorcontrib><title>How readable and reliable is online patient information on chronic rhinosinusitis?</title><title>Journal of laryngology and otology</title><addtitle>J. Laryngol. Otol</addtitle><description>ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the quality and readability of websites on chronic rhinosinusitis.MethodsA total of 180 results from 3 different search engines regarding ‘chronic rhinosinusitis’, ‘sinusitis’ and ‘sinus infections’ were analysed for readability using the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease Score and Gunning Fog Index. The Discern tool was used to approximate information quality.ResultsFrom 180 total searches, 69 unique websites were identified. These had an average Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level of 9.75 (95 per cent confidence interval = 9.12–10.4), a Flesch Reading Ease Score of 45.0 (41.0–49.0) and a Gunning Fog Index of 13.7 (12.9–14.4), which equates to the average reading level of a college or university student. Discern scores were variable but consistently showed good-quality information.ConclusionChronic rhinosinusitis information is of a high quality but is for a reading level higher than that of the average adult. Standardising patient information should ensure adequate comprehension and improve patient compliance.</description><subject>Confidence intervals</subject><subject>Main Articles</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Polyps</subject><subject>Readability</subject><subject>Reading</subject><subject>Rhinitis</subject><subject>Rhinosinusitis</subject><subject>Search engines</subject><subject>Search strategies</subject><subject>Sinus</subject><subject>Sinusitis</subject><subject>University graduates</subject><subject>University students</subject><subject>Websites</subject><issn>0022-2151</issn><issn>1748-5460</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kEtLAzEUhYMoWB8_wN2AGzejN89JVyJFrVAQfKyHTCaxKTNJTWYQ_72pLQiKq8vhfOdwOQidYbjEgKurZwBCCOaYYADM-XQPTXDFZMmZgH002djlxj9ERymtIEMVkAl6moePIhrVqqYzhfJtFp37Fi4VwXfOm2KtBmf8UDhvQ-yzCD5bhV7G4J0u4tL5kJwfkxtcuj5BB1Z1yZzu7jF6vbt9mc3LxeP9w-xmUWrKYSgxJbQyjZTAFKYUbCNsVrK1khPDACqrNecU80YoO21bqystreFSWEaalh6ji23vOob30aSh7l3SpuuUN2FMNeGMYUGExBk9_4Wuwhh9_i5THEReh7NM4S2lY0gpGluvo-tV_Kwx1JuV6z8r5wzdZVTfRNe-mZ_q_1NfMxl-Ig</recordid><startdate>202107</startdate><enddate>202107</enddate><creator>Habeeb, A</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202107</creationdate><title>How readable and reliable is online patient information on chronic rhinosinusitis?</title><author>Habeeb, A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c350t-13237eb8804a1330fb6fb888df852e4007fcc55315b6af9ddfc7c8fe586f42bd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Confidence intervals</topic><topic>Main Articles</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Polyps</topic><topic>Readability</topic><topic>Reading</topic><topic>Rhinitis</topic><topic>Rhinosinusitis</topic><topic>Search engines</topic><topic>Search strategies</topic><topic>Sinus</topic><topic>Sinusitis</topic><topic>University graduates</topic><topic>University students</topic><topic>Websites</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Habeeb, A</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of laryngology and otology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Habeeb, A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How readable and reliable is online patient information on chronic rhinosinusitis?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of laryngology and otology</jtitle><addtitle>J. Laryngol. Otol</addtitle><date>2021-07</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>135</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>644</spage><epage>647</epage><pages>644-647</pages><issn>0022-2151</issn><eissn>1748-5460</eissn><abstract>ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the quality and readability of websites on chronic rhinosinusitis.MethodsA total of 180 results from 3 different search engines regarding ‘chronic rhinosinusitis’, ‘sinusitis’ and ‘sinus infections’ were analysed for readability using the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease Score and Gunning Fog Index. The Discern tool was used to approximate information quality.ResultsFrom 180 total searches, 69 unique websites were identified. These had an average Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level of 9.75 (95 per cent confidence interval = 9.12–10.4), a Flesch Reading Ease Score of 45.0 (41.0–49.0) and a Gunning Fog Index of 13.7 (12.9–14.4), which equates to the average reading level of a college or university student. Discern scores were variable but consistently showed good-quality information.ConclusionChronic rhinosinusitis information is of a high quality but is for a reading level higher than that of the average adult. Standardising patient information should ensure adequate comprehension and improve patient compliance.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0022215121001559</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0022-2151 |
| ispartof | Journal of laryngology and otology, 2021-07, Vol.135 (7), p.644-647 |
| issn | 0022-2151 1748-5460 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2544162681 |
| source | Cambridge University Press Journals Complete |
| subjects | Confidence intervals Main Articles Patients Polyps Readability Reading Rhinitis Rhinosinusitis Search engines Search strategies Sinus Sinusitis University graduates University students Websites |
| title | How readable and reliable is online patient information on chronic rhinosinusitis? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T05%3A56%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20readable%20and%20reliable%20is%20online%20patient%20information%20on%20chronic%20rhinosinusitis?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20laryngology%20and%20otology&rft.au=Habeeb,%20A&rft.date=2021-07&rft.volume=135&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=644&rft.epage=647&rft.pages=644-647&rft.issn=0022-2151&rft.eissn=1748-5460&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0022215121001559&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2550600254%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2550600254&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0022215121001559&rfr_iscdi=true |