How understandable are the patient education materials about flat foot on the Internet for parents?

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorCiftci, Sadettin
dc.contributor.authorSahin, Erdem
dc.contributor.authorAktas, Suha Ahmet
dc.contributor.authorSafali, Selim
dc.contributor.authorDurgut, Fatih
dc.contributor.authorAydin, Bahattin Kerem
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T17:08:21Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T17:08:21Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractFlat foot is a common reason for parents to visit orthopedic clinics. As the Internet has become an easy-search platform, parents often seek online educational materials before seeking out a professional. The aim of this study was to investigate the quality, readability, and understandability of such online materials for parents. An Internet search was performed for flat foot and pes planus using the Google search engine. The readability was evaluated using 6 different grading systems: Flesch Reading Ease Score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, Fry Readability score, Gunning Fog Index tests, and Automated Readability Index. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool test was used to assess the understandability. For quality assessment, the Journal of American Medical Association benchmark criteria and Health on the Net code were applied. One hundred nine websites were included and evaluated for readability, understandability, and quality. The mean readability grade for all websites was 10.5 +/- 2.0. The mean Gunning Fog Index tests and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level scores for all websites were 12.4 +/- 2.2 and 9.7 +/- 2.1 sequentially. The mean Coleman-Liau index score was 10.0 +/- 1.5, and the average Fry Readability score was 9.9 +/- 2.0. The automated readability index for all websites was 10.3 +/- 2.5. The average Flesch Reading Ease score for all educational materials was 59.3 +/- 10.1. The average Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool score for all educational materials was 81% (range, 70-87%). The mean Journal of American Medical Association benchmark criterion for all websites was 1.0, with a range from 1.0 and 2.0. Eighteen (16.5%) websites had Health on the Net certificates. Readability, understandability, and quality of patient education materials about flat feet on the Internet vary and are often worse than professional recommendations.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/MD.0000000000032791
dc.identifier.issn0025-7974
dc.identifier.issn1536-5964
dc.identifier.issue6en_US
dc.identifier.pmid36820566
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85148370484
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000032791
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/17310
dc.identifier.volume102en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000935609400034
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkinsen_US
dc.relation.ispartofMedicine
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectFlat Feeten_US
dc.subjectOnline Patient Educationen_US
dc.subjectPes Planusen_US
dc.subjectQualityen_US
dc.subjectReadabilityen_US
dc.subjectUnderstandabilityen_US
dc.titleHow understandable are the patient education materials about flat foot on the Internet for parents?en_US
dc.titleHow understandable are the patient education materials about flat foot on the Internet for parents?
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu