Readability of Patient-Reported Outcome Questionnaires For Use With Persons With Tinnitus

Quality and Readability of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss Prevention-Related Websites

OBJECTIVE

This cross-sectional website analysis aimed to determine the readability and quality of English and Spanish websites pertaining to the prevention of noise-induced hearing loss.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional website analysis.

SETTING

Various online search engines.

METHODS

We queried four popular search engines using the term "noise-induced hearing loss prevention" to reveal the top 50 English and top 50 Spanish websites for data collection. Websites meeting inclusion criteria were stratified based on the presence of a Health on the Net Code certificate (independent assessment of honesty, reliability, and quality). Websites were then independently reviewed by experts using the DISCERN criteria in order to assess information quality. Readability was calculated using the Flesch reading ease score for English and the Fernandez-Huerta formula for Spanish websites.

RESULTS

Thirty-six English websites and 32 Spanish websites met the inclusion criteria. English websites had significantly lower readability (average = 56.34, SD = 11.17) compared to Spanish websites (average = 61.88, SD = 5.33) (P < .05). Spanish websites (average = 37, SD = 8.47) were also of significantly higher quality than English websites (average = 25.13, SD = 10.11).

CONCLUSION

This study emphasizes the importance of providing quality and readable materials to patients seeking information about noise-induced hearing loss prevention. All of the English and Spanish websites reviewed were written at a level higher than the American Medical Association-recommended sixth-grade reading level. The study also highlights the need for evidence-based information online provided by experts in our field.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Hearing Aid Benefit and Satisfaction: Content Validity and Readability

PURPOSE

Numerous patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are available to measure hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. It is unclear to what extent currently available PROMs on hearing aid outcomes, often developed decades ago, meet current guidelines for good content validity and readability. This study evaluated the content validity and readability of PROMs that focus on perceived hearing aid benefit and/or satisfaction.

METHOD

A literature review was conducted to identify eligible instruments. Content validity evaluation included mapping extracted questionnaire items to the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework. In addition, study design in content validity methodology was evaluated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments study design checklist for PROM instruments. Readability was estimated using the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook measure.

RESULTS

Thirteen questionnaires were identified and evaluated. Item content focused primarily on the components of environmental factors as well as activity limitations and participation restrictions with less emphasis on body functions and personal factors. The content validity methodology analysis revealed an underuse or lack of reporting of a qualitative methodology in assessing patient and professional perspectives. All the included questionnaires exceeded the recommended sixth-grade reading level.

CONCLUSIONS

The categories covered by hearing aid PROMs vary considerably, with no single instrument comprehensively covering all the key ICF components. Future development of hearing aid outcome measures should consider a mixed methodology approach for improved content validity and ensure an appropriate reading level.

The association between patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient participation in chronic care: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly applied in chronic care due to their many functionalities and synergies with current healthcare policies. The participatory potential of PROs is especially emphasised in the Danish context. This review scrutinises the association between PRO and patient participation in chronic care.

METHODS

This scoping review adheres to PRISMA-ScR guidelines, and the synthesis is based on narrative and thematic analyses.

RESULTS

Eighty-four articles were deemed eligible. The association between PRO and patient participation regards seven themes: PRO development, response rates and patient burden, patient empowerment and self-management, display and quality of data, patient-clinician communication, shared decision-making, and organisational and attitudinal aspects. Lack of knowledge, actor attitudes, organisational setup, and technological infrastructure act as the main barriers.

CONCLUSION

The connection between PROs and patient participation is dialectic and unfolds in three phases-before, during, and after patient-clinician consultation. Knowledge regarding the last phase is particularly scarce. Henceforth, studies should address how to include a broader segment of patients, PROs participatory effects over time and PROs impact on patients' everyday lives.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The review provides knowledge concerning the association between PROs and patient participation to enhance future chronic care, research, and discussions in the area.

The experiences of community-dwelling individuals with newly diagnosed type-2 diabetes in using patient-reported outcomes in a municipal setting

Objective

The aim of this study was to examine the experiences of citizens with newly diagnosed type-2 diabetes when using a newly developed and implemented patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaire as part of clinical practice in a municipal setting. Specifically, the citizens’ experiences in completing the PRO questionnaire and using the PRO data in consultations were examined.

Methods

The study was based on participant observations and semi-structured interviews and conducted at the Centre for Diabetes in Copenhagen and online. Participants were recruited deliberately to represent different cases of citizens with type-2 diabetes. Ten citizens were observed during consultation with an healthcare professional (HCP) and subsequently interviewed. The interviews were recorded as audio or video and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis was performed on the basis of previously described guidelines.

Results

The PRO instigated reflections and enlightened citizens on disease-specific matters and motivated citizens to engage in self-management activities. During the citizen-HCP consultations, the PRO data prepared the actors before the meeting and enabled structured, effective and relevant conversations. However, the PRO questionnaire lacked response options, triggered citizen concerns about future health conditions and made them unsure if their answers were correct and aware that they lacked disease-specific knowledge. The experiences were linked to the citizens' situation as newly diagnosed with type-2 diabetes.

Conclusion

The informants found the PRO questionnaire and data meaningful and useful. However, adjustments are needed if the PRO instrument is to resemble the disease situation of citizens with newly diagnosed type-2 diabetes.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Voice: An Updated Readability Analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether voice-related patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) developed and validated since 2011 meet the recommendation by health literacy experts that such materials be written at a fifth-to-sixth grade reading level.

METHOD

A readability analysis of eight voice-related PROMs was conducted. Readability formulas utilized were the Coleman-Liau index, Flesch-Kincaid reading ease, FORCAST, simple measure of Gobbledygook index, and Gunning-Fog score.

RESULT

Three-fourths of the PROMs exceeded the recommended fifth- to sixth-grade reading level.

CONCLUSION

Although awareness of health literacy has grown, voice-related PROMs continue to be developed without full consideration of their reading grade level. Researchers should consider revising or developing PROMs with consideration to reading grade level as well as other features to enhance readability.

Readability analysis of pediatric otolaryngology patient-reported outcome measures

OBJECTIVE

(s): Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are tools that allow patients to directly share information about their health with their healthcare provider. Health literacy experts recommend that health information, such as PROMs, be written at a 6th grade level to ensure patients can read and comprehend it. As the readability of PROMs used in pediatric otolaryngology has yet to be studied, our goal was to analyze the readability of these PROMs and assess their compliance with readability recommendations.

METHODS

The Gunning Fog, the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and the FORCAST readability formulas were used to determine the readability of disease-specific PROMs for pediatric otolaryngology.

RESULTS

Fourteen PROMs were reviewed in the study. Most were intended for caregiver completion (n = 13, 92.9%). Ten PROMs when measured by Gunning Fog (71.4%), 2 PROMs when measured by SMOG (14.3%), and 0 PROMs when measured by FORCAST (0.0%) were at or below the 6th grade reading level.

CONCLUSION

Most PROMs available for use in pediatric otolaryngology are above the recommended 6th grade reading level when measured by FORCAST, the most appropriate metric for assessing questionnaires. The high reading grade level needed to complete these PROMs can contribute to health disparities among underserved and vulnerable populations, such as children. Pediatric otolaryngology PROMs developed in the future should take readability into account in order to ensure equity in the delivery of care.

Quality, Readability, and Suitability of Hearing Health-Related Materials: A Descriptive Review

Objectives The objective of this descriptive review was to determine the quality, readability, and suitability of ear and hearing health information and materials for patients and their significant others. Method A literature search was conducted between August 2018 and April 2019 in the databases CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE, and PsychInfo. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to shortlist studies. Data regarding quality, suitability, and readability were extracted from the included studies. Data were assessed qualitatively. Results There were 34 studies included in this review. Of those, eight examined quality, 33 assessed readability, and four investigated the suitability of materials. The range of materials assessed included diagnostic reports, patient education materials (PEMs), patient-reported outcome measures, and websites. Quality elements were examined in studies focusing on website information. Findings indicated that most websites were of poor quality. Suitability was examined in studies focusing on PEMs such as hearing aid user guides. Findings indicated that most of the existing materials were not suitable for the intended populations. The reading grade level of information across all four categories was found to be higher than the recommended fifth or sixth reading grade level for health-related materials. Revisions of some diagnostic reports and PEMs showed that improvements are possible. Conclusions This review suggests that ear- and hearing-related materials generally have lower quality and suitability with higher readability (more difficult to read). Development of materials that are suitable, of high quality, and at the appropriate readability levels is required to improve accessibility of ear- and hearing-related materials.

Readability of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Adult Audiologic Rehabilitation

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the readability of published patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) designed for use in adult audiologic rehabilitation. The readability results were compared with the readability levels recommended for health information by health literacy experts.

METHOD

Reading grade levels were calculated using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Formula (Flesch, 1948), Gunning Fog Index (Gunning, 1952), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (McLaughlin, 1969), and FORCAST (Caylor, Sticht, Fox, & Ford, 1973) readability formulas for 10 published PROMs. Descriptive statistics were computed across the different PROM sections: instructions, items, response scale, and overall contents of the measure directed toward respondents.

RESULTS

The majority of the PROM sections exceeded the 6th grade reading level recommended by health literacy experts, regardless of the formula applied. All PROM sections exceeded the 6th grade reading level when calculated according to the FORCAST formula, the most appropriate readability formula for use with a nonnarrative text format, such as PROMs.

CONCLUSIONS

When developing or reevaluating PROMs designed for use in adult audiologic rehabilitation, researchers should consider ways to improve the readability of their measure, as poor readability may affect the validity of the empirical data collected using the PROM. Additionally, the adequate readability of audiologic PROMs is required if patient/family-centered care values are to be adhered to within the field of adult audiologic rehabilitation.

Readability Level of Spanish-Language Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Audiology and Otolaryngology

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the readability level of the Spanish versions of several audiology- and otolaryngology-related patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and include a readability analysis of 2 translation approaches when available-the published version and a "functionalist" version-using a team-based collaborative approach including community members.

METHOD

Readability levels were calculated using the Fry Graph adapted for Spanish, as well as the Fernandez-Huerta and the Spaulding formulae for several commonly used audiology- and otolaryngology-related PROMs.

RESULTS

Readability calculations agreed with previous studies analyzing audiology-related PROMs in English and demonstrated many Spanish-language PROMs were beyond the 5th grade reading level suggested for health-related materials written for the average population. In addition, the functionalist versions of the PROMs yielded lower grade-level (improved) readability levels than the published versions.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest many of the Spanish-language PROMs evaluated here are beyond the recommended readability levels and may be influenced by the approach to translation. Moreover, improved readability may be possible using a functionalist approach to translation. Future analysis of the suitability of outcome measures and the quality of their translations should move beyond readability and include an evaluation of the individual's comprehension of the written text.

Pediatric Audiology Report: Assessment and Revision of an Audiology Report Written to Parents of Children With Hearing Impairment

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was twofold: first, to evaluate a typical pediatric diagnostic audiology report to establish its readability and comprehensibility for parents and, second, to revise the report to improve its readability, as well as the comprehension, sense of self-efficacy, and positive opinions of parent readers.

METHOD

In Experiment 1, a mock audiology report was evaluated via a readability analysis and semistructured interviews with 5 parents. In Experiment 2, the report was revised using best practice guidelines and parental recommendations from Experiment 1. The revision was verified by randomly assigning 32 new parent participants to read either the revised or unrevised report before their comprehension, self-efficacy, and opinions were assessed.

RESULTS

In Experiment 1, results confirmed that the report was difficult to read and understand. In Experiment 2, parents who read the revised report had significantly greater comprehension, self-efficacy, and opinion ratings than those who read the unrevised report. In addition, the readability of the revised report was markedly improved compared with the unrevised report.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that pediatric diagnostic audiology reports can be revised to adhere to best practice guidelines and yield improved readability, in addition to improving the comprehension, sense of self-efficacy, and positive opinions of parents of children with hearing impairment.

Readability of Questionnaires Assessing Listening Difficulties Associated With (Central) Auditory Processing Disorders

Purpose

Eight English-language, student- or parent proxy-administered questionnaires for (central) auditory processing disorders, or (C)APD, were analyzed for readability. For student questionnaires, readability levels were checked against the approximate reading grade levels by intended administration age per the questionnaires' developers. For proxy questionnaires, results were compared to the reading grade level for the average U.S. adult and the minimum 5th- to 6th-grade reading level for health materials as recommended by adult health literacy experts.

Method

This was a descriptive study that was based on the results of a commercially available readability calculations software package. Text-based files of the 8 questionnaires were analyzed using 3 readability formulas: FORCAST (Caylor & Sticht, 1973), Flesch Reading Ease (FRE; Flesch, 1948), and Gunning’s Fog index (FOG; Gunning, 1952).

Results

The FORCAST formula, the most appropriate for nonnarrative-type materials, indicated that all 8 questionnaires were written at reading levels between the 8th and 10th grades. The FRE and FOG formulas, designed for narrative-type materials, were generally in good agreement with one another but varied widely between the upper 4th- and 12th-grade levels.

Conclusion

In an effort to decrease respondent burden, developers should consider readability as another testable psychometric construct. Clinicians should take into account the functional health literacy skills of adult proxy respondents when giving self-administered questionnaires.

A computer-based readability analysis of patient-reported outcome questionnaires related to oral health quality of life

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the readability of published patient-related outcome (PRO) questionnaires completed by persons with oral disease and to compare the readability results to existing data about average reading levels for adults living in the United States.

METHODS

A search was conducted via Pubmed and Google Scholar to identify PRO oral health-related questionnaires completed by patients. Reading grade levels were analyzed for 10 oral health-related PRO questionnaires using three readability formulas.

RESULTS

The most significant results were as follows:

CONCLUSION

Developers of PRO questionnaires should consider readability as another testable construct.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

To obtain the most useful information for treatment planning and outcomes assessments, the dental professional should consider the reading level needed to understand a particular PRO questionnaire.

Readability of patient-reported outcome questionnaires for use with persons who stutter

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the readability of several published patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires for use with persons who stutter, and to compare the readability results to existing data about average reading levels for English-speaking adults living in the United States.

DESIGN

Published PRO questionnaires were identified that are traditionally completed by persons who stutter in a self-administered format.

METHOD

Reading grade levels were analyzed using the Flesch Reading Ease, FOG, and FORCAST formulas as computed by a readability calculations software package. Descriptive statistics were computed across the questionnaires.

RESULTS

The results of this study demonstrate that many of the PRO questionnaires exceeded the fifth to sixth grade reading levels recommended by health literacy experts.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinician should consider the average reading level needed to understand a particular PRO questionnaire when administering it to a patient or their proxy. Likewise, developers of PRO questionnaires should consider reading level of respondents and include information about this when reporting psychometric data.

EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES

The reader will get an overview over the literature on patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires and their use with persons who stutter and will be able to: (1) define readability, (2) describe how reading levels are determined for a given PRO questionnaire, (3) list the strengths and limitations of readability assessment in the evaluation of persons who stutter and (4) analyze the role of readability assessment in future PRO questionnaire development.