Online patient resources about lung cancer, radiology not written at recommended reading level
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and American Medical Association (AMA) recommend that patient education resources be written between a third- and seventh-grade reading level to ensure a maximum number of patients can comprehend the information. However, according to a new study published by the American Journal of Roentgenology, popular online resources related to lung cancer screening are written at a reading level well beyond those recommendations.
The authors searched for four terms related to lung cancer and radiology—“lung cancer screening,” “radiation,” “pulmonary nodule” and “low-dose CT”—and selected the first 20 online resources for each term. Only resources written specifically to educate patients were studied.
Overall, most of the 80 online resources were written at a reading level “well above” the NIH and AMA recommendations. The resources related to “radiation,” “pulmonary nodule” and “low-dose CT” all had a mean reading level of 12th grade or higher.
“Lung cancer screening was the only search term with a mean reading level under that of a high school education; however, it was still well above the NIH- and AMA-recommended reading level,” wrote lead author David Richard Hansberry, MD, department of radiology at Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals in Philadelphia, and colleagues.
Hansberry et al. noted that this discrepancy could potentially be harming the health literacy of patients throughout the United States. “Creating patient education materials that are of the appropriate reading level is essential because patients in lower educational levels are those who would benefit the most,” the authors wrote. “Patients at the lowest educational levels have significantly higher risks of lung cancer, higher mortality rates from lung cancer, and lower rates of smoking cessation than those with higher educational attainment. Patient education materials that are difficult to understand may not be as effective for these patients and therefore may limit the benefits that these patients can derive.”
The authors also detailed evidence that shows patients are interested in learning about these topics. Educational radiology websites receive more than one million visitors each month, for instance, showing that there is certainly a desire from patients to learn more about their own healthcare.
So what can be done? According to Hansberry and colleagues, it’s not about providing worse information or less detail—it’s about making the information easier to comprehend.
“It is reasonable to suspect that lowering the reading level of education materials may reduce the quality of the information being conveyed to the reader,” the authors wrote. “However, using simpler sentence structure, less complex words, and words with fewer characters can convey the same information in a more easily understood text. For example, breaking complex and compound sentences into easier-to-understand simple sentences will reduce the reading level while maintaining the integrity of the content.”
Michael has more than 18 years of experience as a professional writer and editor. He has written at length about cardiology, radiology, artificial intelligence and other key healthcare topics.