Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Itch terminology is ambiguous. How itch was described in online materials and how terminology influenced the readability of these materials was previously unknown.
METHODS: Two groups of search terms, itch and prurigo, were translated into five of the most prevalent European Union (EU) languages. The itch group consisted of \"itch\" and \"pruritus.\" The prurigo group consisted of \"prurigo,\" \"prurigo nodularis,\" and \"chronic prurigo\". Then, a search of the terms in each language was queried in the Google search engine in the private mode of the Internet browser. The first 50 results generated were assessed for suitability. Patient education was the primary objective of the materials provided, with no barriers or advertisements included. In cases where the terms yielded identical outcomes, any duplicated materials were omitted from the analysis. When translating search terms within a group led to just one shared transcription, the results were attributed to the search term with the most similar syntax. The Lix score was utilized to assess readability.
RESULTS: 314 articles in English, German, Italian, French, and Spanish were evaluated. The term \"pruritus\" was the most commonly used description for the sensation of itching, with 142 (45%) articles included. Overall, the mean Lix score was 54 ± 9, classifying all articles as hard to comprehend. Articles in the itch group had significantly (P < 0.001) lower mean Lix score (52 ± 9) than materials in the prurigo group (56 ± 10).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite being more accessible to conceptualize, skin conditions such as prurigo had lower readability compared to information about the itch itself. The distinction between \"itch\" and \"pruritus\" was unclear.
METHODS: Two groups of search terms, itch and prurigo, were translated into five of the most prevalent European Union (EU) languages. The itch group consisted of \"itch\" and \"pruritus.\" The prurigo group consisted of \"prurigo,\" \"prurigo nodularis,\" and \"chronic prurigo\". Then, a search of the terms in each language was queried in the Google search engine in the private mode of the Internet browser. The first 50 results generated were assessed for suitability. Patient education was the primary objective of the materials provided, with no barriers or advertisements included. In cases where the terms yielded identical outcomes, any duplicated materials were omitted from the analysis. When translating search terms within a group led to just one shared transcription, the results were attributed to the search term with the most similar syntax. The Lix score was utilized to assess readability.
RESULTS: 314 articles in English, German, Italian, French, and Spanish were evaluated. The term \"pruritus\" was the most commonly used description for the sensation of itching, with 142 (45%) articles included. Overall, the mean Lix score was 54 ± 9, classifying all articles as hard to comprehend. Articles in the itch group had significantly (P < 0.001) lower mean Lix score (52 ± 9) than materials in the prurigo group (56 ± 10).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite being more accessible to conceptualize, skin conditions such as prurigo had lower readability compared to information about the itch itself. The distinction between \"itch\" and \"pruritus\" was unclear.
摘要：
背景：itch术语是模糊的。以前未知在线材料中如何描述瘙痒以及术语如何影响这些材料的可读性。
方法：两组搜索词，痒和痒疹,被翻译成五种最流行的欧盟(EU)语言。瘙痒组包括“瘙痒”和“瘙痒”。\“普鲁里戈组由\”普鲁里戈组成，\"\"结节性痒疹,\"和\"慢性痒疹\"。然后，在Internet浏览器的私有模式下，在Google搜索引擎中查询每种语言的术语搜索。评估产生的前50个结果的适用性。患者教育是所提供材料的主要目标，没有障碍或广告。在这些术语产生相同结果的情况下，分析中省略了任何重复的材料。当在一个组内翻译搜索词时，只导致一个共享转录，结果归因于语法最相似的搜索词。Lix评分用于评估可读性。
结果：314篇英文文章，德语,意大利语,法语,和西班牙语进行了评估。术语“瘙痒”是最常用的瘙痒感描述，包括142篇(45%)文章。总的来说,平均Lix评分为54±9分,将所有文章分类为难以理解.瘙痒组的平均Lix评分（52±9）明显低于瘙痒组的材料（56±10）（P<0.001）。
结论：尽管更易于概念化，与有关瘙痒本身的信息相比，皮肤状况（例如prurigo）的可读性较低。“瘙痒”和“瘙痒”之间的区别不清楚。
方法：两组搜索词，痒和痒疹,被翻译成五种最流行的欧盟(EU)语言。瘙痒组包括“瘙痒”和“瘙痒”。\“普鲁里戈组由\”普鲁里戈组成，\"\"结节性痒疹,\"和\"慢性痒疹\"。然后，在Internet浏览器的私有模式下，在Google搜索引擎中查询每种语言的术语搜索。评估产生的前50个结果的适用性。患者教育是所提供材料的主要目标，没有障碍或广告。在这些术语产生相同结果的情况下，分析中省略了任何重复的材料。当在一个组内翻译搜索词时，只导致一个共享转录，结果归因于语法最相似的搜索词。Lix评分用于评估可读性。
结果：314篇英文文章，德语,意大利语,法语,和西班牙语进行了评估。术语“瘙痒”是最常用的瘙痒感描述，包括142篇(45%)文章。总的来说,平均Lix评分为54±9分,将所有文章分类为难以理解.瘙痒组的平均Lix评分（52±9）明显低于瘙痒组的材料（56±10）（P<0.001）。
结论：尽管更易于概念化，与有关瘙痒本身的信息相比，皮肤状况（例如prurigo）的可读性较低。“瘙痒”和“瘙痒”之间的区别不清楚。
