Aims/Background Seroma formation is the most common complication following breast surgery. However, there is little evidence on the readability of online patient education materials on this issue. This study aimed to assess the accessibility and readability of the relevant online information. Methods This systematic review of the literature identified 37 relevant websites for further analysis. The readability of each online article was assessed through using a range of readability formulae. Results The average Flesch-Reading Ease score for all patient education materials was 53.9 (± 21.9) and the average Flesch-Kincaid reading grade level was 7.32 (± 3.1), suggesting they were \'fairly difficult\' to read and is higher than the recommended reading level. Conclusion Online patient education materials regarding post-surgery breast seroma are at a higher-than-recommended reading grade level for the public. Improvement would allow all patients, regardless of literacy level, to access such resources to aid decision-making around undergoing breast surgery.

Most cases of optic neuritis (ON) occur in women and in patients between the ages of 15 and 45 years, which represents a key demographic of individuals who seek health information using the internet. As clinical providers strive to ensure patients have accessible information to understand their condition, assessing the standard of online resources is essential. To assess the quality, content, accountability, and readability of online information for optic neuritis. This cross-sectional study analyzed 11 freely available medical sites with information on optic neuritis and used PubMed as a gold standard for comparison. Twelve questions were composed to include the information most relevant to patients, and each website was independently examined by four neuro-ophthalmologists. Readability was analyzed using an online readability tool. Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, four criteria designed to assess the quality of health information further were used to evaluate the accountability of each website. Freely available online information. On average, websites scored 27.98 (SD ± 9.93, 95% CI 24.96-31.00) of 48 potential points (58.3%) for the twelve questions. There were significant differences in the comprehensiveness and accuracy of content across websites (p < .001). The mean reading grade level of websites was 11.90 (SD ± 2.52, 95% CI 8.83-15.25). Zero websites achieved all four JAMA benchmarks. Interobserver reliability was robust between three of four neuro-ophthalmologist (NO) reviewers (ρ = 0.77 between NO3 and NO2, ρ = 0.91 between NO3 and NO1, ρ = 0.74 between NO2 and NO1; all p < .05). The quality of freely available online information detailing optic neuritis varies by source, with significant room for improvement. The material presented is difficult to interpret and exceeds the recommended reading level for health information. Most websites reviewed did not provide comprehensive information regarding non-therapeutic aspects of the disease. Ophthalmology organizations should be encouraged to create content that is more accessible to the general public.

(1) Background: The wording of informed consent forms could hinder their comprehension and hinder patients\' autonomous choice. The objective of this study was to analyze the readability and comprehension of anesthesia informed consent forms in a Spanish county hospital. (2) Methods: Descriptive and cross-sectional study carried out on patients who were going to undergo anesthetic techniques. The readability of the forms was analyzed using the INFLESZ tool and their subjective comprehension using an ad hoc questionnaire. (3) Results: The analyzed forms presented a \"somewhat difficult\" legibility. A total of 44.2% of the patients decided not to read the form, mainly because they had previously undergone surgery with the same anesthetic technique. The language used in the forms was considered inadequate by 49.5% of the patients and 53.3% did not comprehend it in its entirety. A statistically significant negative correlation of age and INFLESZ readability score with the overall questionnaire score was found. A statistically significant association was observed as a function of age and educational level with the different criteria of the questionnaire. (4) Conclusions: The anesthesia informed consent forms presented low readability with limited comprehension. It would be necessary to improve their wording to favor comprehension and to guarantee patients\' freedom of choice.

UNASSIGNED: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and American Medical Association (AMA) recommend that online health information be written at a maximum 6th grade reading level. The aim was to evaluate online resources regarding shoulder arthroscopy utilizing measures of readability, understandability, and actionability, using syntax reading grade level and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT-P).
UNASSIGNED: An online Google™ search utilizing \"shoulder arthroscopy\" was performed. From the top 50 results, websites directed at educating patients were included. News and scientific articles, audiovisual materials, industry websites, and unrelated materials were excluded. Readability was calculated using objective algorithms: Flesch-Kincaid Grade-Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) grade, Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), and Gunning-Fog Index (GFI). The PEMAT-P was used to assess understandability and actionability, with a 70% score threshold. Scores were compared across academic institutions, private practices, and commercial health publishers. The correlation between search rank and readability, understandability, and actionability was calculated.
UNASSIGNED: Two independent searches yielded 53 websites, with 44 (83.02%) meeting inclusion criteria. No mean readability score performed below a 10th grade reading level. Only one website scored at or below 6th grade reading level. Mean understandability and actionability scores were 63.02%±12.09 and 29.77%±20.63, neither of which met the PEMAT threshold. Twelve (27.27%) websites met the understandability threshold, while none met the actionability threshold. Institution categories scored similarly in understandability (61.71%, 62.68%, 63.67%) among academic, private practice, and commercial health publishers respectively (p=0.9536). No readability or PEMAT score correlated with search rank.
UNASSIGNED: Online shoulder arthroscopy patient education materials score poorly in readability, understandability, and actionability. One website scored at the NIH and AMA recommended reading level, and 27.27% of websites scored above the 70% PEMAT score for understandability. None met the actionability threshold. Future efforts should improve online resources to optimize patient education and facilitate informed decision-making. Level of Evidence: IV.

UNASSIGNED: Patients often access online resources to educate themselves prior to undergoing elective surgery such as carpal tunnel release (CTR). The purpose of this study was to evaluate available online resources regarding CTR on objective measures of readability (syntax reading grade-level), understandability (ability to convey key messages in a comprehensible manner), and actionability (providing actions the reader may take).
UNASSIGNED: The study conducted two independent Google searches for \"Carpal Tunnel Surgery\" and among the top 50 results, analyzed articles aimed at educating patients about CTR. Readability was assessed using six different indices: Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Index, Flesch Reading Ease, Gunning Fog Index, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index, Coleman Liau Index, Automated Readability Index. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool evaluated understandability and actionability on a 0-100% scale. Spearman\'s correlation assessed relationships between these metrics and Google search ranks, with p<0.05 indicating statistical significance.
UNASSIGNED: Of the 39 websites meeting the inclusion criteria, the mean readability grade level exceeded 9, with the lowest being 9.4 ± 1.5 (SMOG index). Readability did not correlate with Google search ranking (lowest p=0.25). Mean understandability and actionability were 59% ± 15 and 26% ± 24, respectively. Only 28% of the articles used visual aids, and few provided concise summaries or clear, actionable steps. Notably, lower grade reading levels were linked to higher actionability scores (p ≤ 0.02 in several indices), but no readability metrics significantly correlated with understandability. Google search rankings showed no significant association with either understandability or actionability scores.
UNASSIGNED: Online educational materials for CTR score poorly in readability, understandability, and actionability. Quality metrics do not appear to affect Google search rankings. The poor quality metric scores found in our study highlight a need for hand specialists to improve online patient resources, especially in an era emphasizing shared decision-making in healthcare. Level of Evidence: IV.

Objective: Despite varying opinions, little research has examined how to best write pediatric neuropsychology reports. Method: This study gathered input from 230 parents on how text difficulty (reading level) and visual emphasis (bullets, underline, italics) affect report readability and utility. We focused on the most-read report section: summary/impressions. Each parent rated the readability and usefulness of a generic summary/impressions section written in four different styles. The four styles crossed text difficulty (high school-vs-collegiate) with use of visual emphasis (absent-vs-present). Results: Parents found versions with easier text to be more clearly written, easier to follow, and easier to find information (p<.001). Parents rated those with harder text to be overly detailed, complex, hard to understand, and hard to read (p<.001). Visual emphasis made it easier to find key information and the text easier to follow and understand - but primarily for versions that were written in difficult text (interaction p≤.026). After rating all four styles, parents picked their preference. They most often picked versions written in easier text with visual emphasis (p<.001). Conclusions: Findings support writing styles that use easier text difficulty and visual emphasis.

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: Ensuring that educational materials geared toward transgender and gender-diverse patients are comprehensible can mitigate barriers to accessing gender-affirming care and understanding postoperative care. This study evaluates the readability of online patient resources related to gender-affirming vaginoplasty.
UNASSIGNED: Online searches for vaginoplasty were conducted in January 2023 using two search engines. The readability scores of the top ten websites and their associated hyperlinked webpages were derived using ten validated readability tests.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 40 pages were assessed from the vaginoplasty searches. The average reading grade level for all the webpages with relevant educational materials was 13.3 (i.e., college level), exceeding the American Medical Association\'s recommended 6th grade reading level.
UNASSIGNED: Complex patient resources may impede patients\' understanding of gender-affirming vaginoplasty. Online patient education resources should be created that are more accessible to patients with diverse reading comprehension capabilities.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the potential of ChatGPT as an accurate and readable source of information for parents seeking guidance on adenoidectomy, tonsillectomy, and ventilation tube insertion surgeries (ATVtis).
METHODS: ChatGPT was tasked with identifying the top 15 most frequently asked questions by parents on internet search engines for each of the three specific surgical procedures. We removed repeated questions from the initial set of 45. Subsequently, we asked ChatGPT to generate answers to the remaining 33 questions. Seven highly experienced otolaryngologists individually assessed the accuracy of the responses using a four-level grading scale, from completely incorrect to comprehensive. The readability of responses was determined using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) scores. The questions were categorized into four groups: Diagnosis and Preparation Process, Surgical Information, Risks and Complications, and Postoperative Process. Responses were then compared based on accuracy grade, FRE, and FKGL scores.
RESULTS: Seven evaluators each assessed 33 AI-generated responses, providing a total of 231 evaluations. Among the evaluated responses, 167 (72.3 %) were classified as \'comprehensive.\' Sixty-two responses (26.8 %) were categorized as \'correct but inadequate,\' and two responses (0.9 %) were assessed as \'some correct, some incorrect.\' None of the responses were adjudged \'completely incorrect\' by any assessors. The average FRE and FGKL scores were 57.15(±10.73) and 9.95(±1.91), respectively. Upon analyzing the responses from ChatGPT, 3 (9.1 %) were at or below the sixth-grade reading level recommended by the American Medical Association (AMA). No significant differences were found between the groups regarding readability and accuracy scores (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT can provide accurate answers to questions on various topics related to ATVtis. However, ChatGPT\'s answers may be too complex for some readers, as they are generally written at a high school level. This is above the sixth-grade reading level recommended for patient information by the AMA. According to our study, more than three-quarters of the AI-generated responses were at or above the 10th-grade reading level, raising concerns about the ChatGPT text\'s readability.

The American Society for Surgery of the Hand and British Society for Surgery of the Hand produce patient-focused information above the sixth-grade readability recommended by the American Medical Association. To promote health equity, patient-focused content should be aimed at an appropriate level of health literacy. Artificial intelligence-driven large language models may be able to assist hand surgery societies in improving the readability of the information provided to patients. The readability was calculated for all the articles written in English on the American Society for Surgery of the Hand and British Society for Surgery of the Hand websites, in terms of seven of the commonest readability formulas. Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer version 4 (ChatGPT-4) was then asked to rewrite each article at a sixth-grade readability level. The readability for each response was calculated and compared with the unedited articles. Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer version 4 was able to improve the readability across all chosen readability formulas and was successful in achieving a mean sixth-grade readability level in terms of the Flesch Kincaid Grade Level and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook calculations. It increased the mean Flesch Reading Ease score, with higher scores representing more readable material. This study demonstrated that ChatGPT-4 can be used to improve the readability of patient-focused material in hand surgery. However, ChatGPT-4 is interested primarily in sounding natural, and not in seeking truth, and hence, each response must be evaluated by the surgeon to ensure that information accuracy is not being sacrificed for the sake of readability by this powerful tool.