A framework for the evaluation of patient information leaflets

Background  The provision of patient information leaflets (PILs) is an important part of health care. PILs require evaluation, but the frameworks that are used for evaluation are largely under‐informed by theory. Most evaluation to date has been based on indices of readability, yet several writers argue that readability is not enough. We propose a framework for evaluating PILs that reflect the central role of the patient perspective in communication and use methods for evaluation based on simple linguistic principles.

[1]  P. Ley,et al.  The use of readability formulas in health care , 1996 .

[2]  Robert N. Kantor,et al.  On the Failure of Readability Formulas to Define Readable Texts: A Case Study from Adaptations. , 1982 .

[3]  L. G. Doak,et al.  Patient comprehension profiles: recent findings and strategies. , 1980, Patient counselling and health education.

[4]  Wilson L. Taylor,et al.  “Cloze Procedure”: A New Tool for Measuring Readability , 1953 .

[5]  Jerry Avorn,et al.  Medication Safety: Effect of Content and Format of Prescription Drug Labels on Readability, Understanding, and Medication Use: A Systematic Review , 2007, The Annals of pharmacotherapy.

[6]  F. Keeley,et al.  The development and validation of a patient‐information booklet on ureteric stents , 2001, BJU international.

[7]  D. Pothier,et al.  Readability statistics of patient information leaflets in a Speech and Language Therapy Department. , 2008, International journal of language & communication disorders.

[8]  J F Mayberry,et al.  Effective Instructions for Patients , 1996, Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London.

[9]  Iddo Gal,et al.  Why organizations continue to create patient information leaflets with readability and usability problems: an exploratory study. , 2005, Health education research.

[10]  Daniela B. Friedman,et al.  A Systematic Review of Readability and Comprehension Instruments Used for Print and Web-Based Cancer Information , 2006, Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education.

[11]  P. Shekelle,et al.  Effect of Content and Format of Prescription Drug Labels on Readability, Understanding, and Medication Use , 2007 .

[12]  R. Flesch.  A new readability yardstick. , 1948, The Journal of applied psychology.

[13]  Ros Dowse,et al.  Effect of Pictograms on Readability of Patient Information Materials , 2003, The Annals of pharmacotherapy.

[14]  G. Leech,et al.  Word Frequencies in Written and Spoken English: based on the British National Corpus , 2001 .

[15]  Austin Henderson,et al.  Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction , 2002, UBIQ.

[16]  G. Harry McLaughlin,et al.  SMOG Grading - A New Readability Formula. , 1969 .

[17]  Cathy D. Meade,et al.  Readability Formulas: Cautions and Criteria , 1991 .

[18]  C. Nelson.  The haunting of communication research by dead metaphors: for reflexive analyses of the communication research literature , 2001 .

[19]  C. Rees,et al.  Patient information leaflets for prostate cancer: which leaflets should healthcare professionals recommend? , 2003, Patient education and counseling.

[20]  D. Helitzer,et al.  Health literacy demands of written health information materials: an assessment of cervical cancer prevention materials. , 2009, Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center.

[21]  Colleen Smith,et al.  Information empowers but who is empowered? , 2004, Communication & medicine.

[22]  G. Bole,et al.  Family support, health beliefs, and therapeutic compliance in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. , 1979, Patient counselling and health education.

[23]  E. L. Briz,et al.  Análisis de las hojas de información al paciente para la obtención de su consentimiento informado en ensayos clínicos , 1999 .

[24]  P. Ley.  The measurement of comprehensibility , 1973 .

[25]  E. Urbieta Sanz,et al.  [An analysis of patient information sheets for obtaining informed consent in clinical trials]. , 1999, Medicina clinica.

[26]  R. Gunning.  The Fog Index After Twenty Years , 1969 .

[27]  V. Entwistle,et al.  Consumer involvement in research projects: the activities of research funders. , 2004, Health policy.

[28]  J. Paul Frantz.  Effect of Location and Procedural Explicitness on User Processing of and Compliance with Product Warnings , 1994 .

[29]  Martin Cutts.  Oxford Guide to Plain English , 2004 .

[30]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[31]  M Dixon-Woods,et al.  Writing wrongs? An analysis of published discourses about the use of patient information leaflets. , 2001, Social science & medicine.

[32]  Margaret G. McKeown,et al.  Revising Social Studies Text from a Text-Processing Perspective: Evidence of Improved Comprehensibility. , 1991 .

[33]  P. Ley,et al.  Communicating with Patients: Improving Communication, Satisfaction and Compliance , 1988 .

[34]  M E Mumford,et al.  A descriptive study of the readability of patient information leaflets designed by nurses. , 1997, Journal of advanced nursing.

[35]  R. Dowse,et al.  Development of written information for antiretroviral therapy: comprehension in a Tanzanian population , 2007, Pharmacy World & Science.

[36]  Patricia Wright,et al.  Criteria and ingredients for successful patient information , 2003, The Journal of audiovisual media in medicine.

[37]  M. Johnston,et al.  Are there valid proxy measures of clinical behaviour? a systematic review , 2009, Implementation science : IS.

[38]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition , 1998 .

[39]  D. Prideaux,et al.  The comprehensibility of Australian educational literature for patients with asthma , 1995, The Medical journal of Australia.

[40]  Sri Hastuti Kurniawan,et al.  Review of Interaction design , 2003 .

[41]  L. Franck,et al.  Ensuring Quality Information for Patients: development and preliminary validation of a new instrument to improve the quality of written health care information , 2004, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[42]  R. P. Fishburne,et al.  Derivation of New Readability Formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count and Flesch Reading Ease Formula) for Navy Enlisted Personnel , 1975 .