Readability and content analysis of print cholesterol education materials.

This article reports the results of an analysis of the readability levels and content of 38 print cholesterol education materials available from government, health agency, professional association, university and industry sources. Each item was characterized according to the primary intended audience (general public, public and screening participants, or those identified with elevated cholesterol and patients in treatment), size, length and appearance. Readability analysis was done using the SMOG and Fog Grading formulas and content analysis examined the presence of messages in each of nine key areas. The readability assessment revealed that the average reading grade level was close to Grade 11, which is too difficult for many adults. Content analysis suggested a need to better address other heart disease risk factors, portion size and the use of brand name food recommendations. Further practice and research needs are identified.

[1]  R. Gunning.  The Technique of Clear Writing. , 1968 .

[2]  K. Glanz,et al.  Health behavior and health education : theory, research, and practice , 1991 .

[3]  T M Grundner,et al.  On the readability of surgical consent forms. , 1980, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  C. Aspy,et al.  Hypercholesterolemia: A plea for a practical solution , 1989 .

[5]  J. Tysinger,et al.  A strategy for designing effective patient education materials. , 1989, Journal of the American Dietetic Association.

[6]  C. Meade,et al.  Patient literacy and the readability of smoking education literature. , 1989, American journal of public health.

[7]  A S Vivian,et al.  Readability of patient education materials. , 1980, Clinical therapeutics.

[8]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[9]  Daniel Steinberg,et al.  Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. The Expert Panel. , 1988, Archives of internal medicine.

[10]  Consumer Curriculum Materials: The First Content Analysis , 1987 .

[11]  K. Glanz.  Patient and public education for cholesterol reduction: a review of strategies and issues. , 1988, Patient education and counseling.

[12]  E. Bartlett.  Eight principles from patient education research , 1985 .

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

[14]  K. Glanz,et al.  Environmental Interventions to Promote Healthy Eating: A Review of Models, Programs, and Evidence , 1988, Health education quarterly.

[15]  B. Rimer,et al.  Informed consent: a crucial step in cancer patient education. , 1984, Health education quarterly.

[16]  Freimuth Vs.  Assessing the readability of health education messages. , 1979 .

[17]  R W Moore,et al.  Readability of Self-Care Instructional Pamphlets for Diabetic Patients , 1981, Diabetes Care.

[18]  W. Waters,et al.  Prescription information leaflets: a pilot study in general practice. , 1983, British medical journal.

[19]  E. Arkin,et al.  Making Health Communication Programs Work. A Planner's Guide. , 1989 .

[20]  H. H. Kassarjian.  Content Analysis in Consumer Research , 1977 .

[21]  Spadero Dc,et al.  Assessing readability of patient information materials , 1983 .