Optimizing Readability and Format of Plain Language Summaries for Medical Research Articles: Cross-sectional Survey Study

Are plain language summaries more readable than scientific abstracts? Evidence from six biomedical and life sciences journals

In recent decades, members of the general public have become increasingly reliant on findings of scientific studies for decision-making. However, scientific writing usually features a heavy use of technical language, which may pose challenges for people outside of the scientific community. To alleviate this issue, plain language summaries were introduced to provide a brief summary of scientific papers in clear and accessible language. Despite increasing attention paid to the research of plain language summaries, little is known about whether these summaries are readable for the intended audiences. Based on a large corpus sampled from six biomedical and life sciences journals, the present study examined the readability and jargon use of plain language summaries and scientific abstracts on a technical level. It was found that (1) plain language summaries were more readable than scientific abstracts, (2) the reading grade levels of plain language summaries were moderately correlated with that of scientific abstracts, (3) researchers used less jargon in plain language summaries than in scientific abstracts, and (4) the readability of and the jargon use in both plain language summaries and scientific abstracts exceeded the recommended threshold for the general public. The findings were discussed with possible explanations. Implications for academic writing and scientific communication were offered.

Simplified COVID-19 guidance for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States' Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) created guidance documents that were too complex to be read and understood by the majority of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities who often read at or below a third-grade reading level. This study explored the extent to which these adults could read and understand CDC documents simplified using Minimised Text Complexity Guidelines.

METHOD

This study involved 20 participants, 18-48 years of age. Participants read texts and responded to multiple-choice items and open-ended questions to gather information about how they interacted with and understood the texts.

RESULTS

The results provide initial evidence that the Minimised Text Complexity Guidelines resulted in texts that participants could read and understand.

CONCLUSION

Implications for increasing the accessibility of public health information so that it can be read and understood by adults with extremely low literacy skills are discussed.

Does the format of result presentation and type of conclusion in Cochrane plain language summaries matter? A randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate whether the format and type of conclusion in Cochrane plain language summaries (PLSs) influence readers' perception of treatment benefit and decision-making.

DESIGN

An online parallel group, three-arm randomised controlled trial was conducted.

SETTING

The study was conducted online.

PARTICIPANTS

The participants were physiotherapy students.

INTERVENTIONS

The participants read two Cochrane PLSs, one with a positive conclusion (strong evidence of benefit) and another with a negative conclusion (strong evidence of non-benefit). Each participant read the results of both reviews presented in one of three formats: (1) numerical, (2) textual or (3) numerical and textual.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the participants' perception of treatment benefit.

RESULTS

All three groups of participants perceived the treatment to have positive effects when the Cochrane PLS had a positive conclusion, regardless of the format of presentation (mean perception of treatment benefit score: textual 7.7 (SD 2.3), numerical 7.9 (SD 1.8), numerical and textual 7.7 (SD 1.7), p=0.362). However, when the Cochrane PLS had a negative conclusion, all three groups of participants failed to perceive a negative effect (mean perception of treatment benefit score: textual 5.5 (SD 3.3), numerical 5.6 (SD 2.7), numerical and textual 5.9 (SD 2.8), p=0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

The format of Cochrane PLSs does not appear to significantly impact physiotherapy students' perception of treatment benefit, understanding of evidence, persuasiveness or confidence in their decision. However, participants' perception of treatment benefit does not align with the conclusion when the Cochrane PLS indicates strong evidence of non-benefit from the intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CTRI/2022/10/046476.

Customization options in consumer health information materials on type-2 diabetes mellitus-an analysis of modifiable features in different types of media

Introduction

The understanding of health-related information is essential for making informed decisions. However, providing health information in an understandable format for everyone is challenging due to differences in consumers' health status, disease knowledge, skills, and preferences. Tailoring health information to individual needs can improve comprehension and increase health literacy.

Objective

The aim of our research was to analyze the extent to which consumers can customize consumer health information materials (CHIMs) for type-2 diabetes mellitus through various media types.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive search for various CHIMs across various media types, such as websites, apps, videos, and printed or printable forms. A representative sample of CHIMs was obtained for analysis through blocked randomization across the various media types. We conducted a quantitative content analysis to determine the frequency of user-centered customization options. Cross-comparisons were made to identify trends and variations in modifiable features among the media.

Results

In our representative sample of 114 CHIMs, we identified a total of 24 modifiable features, which we grouped into five main categories: (i) language, (ii) text, (iii) audiovisual, (iv) presentation, and (v) medical content. Videos offered the most customization opportunities (95%), while 47% of websites and 26% of apps did not allow users to tailor health information. None of the printed or printable materials provided the option to customize the information. Overall, 65% of analyzed CHIMs did not allow users to tailor health information according to their needs.

Conclusion

Our results show that CHIMs for type-2 diabetes mellitus could be significantly improved by providing more customization options for users. Further research is needed to investigate the effectiveness and usability of these options to enhance the development and appropriate provision of modifiable features in health information.

Headache launches the publication of plain language summaries

Plain Language Summary Publication: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/head.14647

Patients at the Heart of the Scientific Dialogue: An Industry Perspective

Pharmaceutical companies need to regularly communicate to patients all essential information about their medicines, especially data from the research studies that were conducted to evaluate the medicine’s benefits and risks. To do that, companies will need to make sure patients have access to and awareness of relevant information. This can be achieved by ensuring medical information is freely available to the reader, and working with publishers to facilitate open access (free) publications. Companies should also help improve patients’ understanding of medical terminology, offer simplified versions of scientific content, and deliver information through various formats (print versus digital, text versus audio versus video) to address different learning styles and literacy levels. This will empower patients with knowledge and improve shared decision-making. It will also be essential for pharmaceutical companies to involve patients in various stages of medicine development, such as getting their input on how the research studies for investigating these medicines are designed and reported to ensure relevant information to patients are well-captured and clear. This should also go in parallel with providing opportunities to elevate the patient voice through patient-partnered research and authorship on topics particularly relevant to them.

Improving access to oncology publications for advocates and people with cancer

Journal articles provide reliable and current information about cancer research. This can offer hope to people with cancer and help them make decisions about their care. Here, the authors suggest ways in which different groups may help people with cancer to find, view, and understand articles. For example, journals should make articles free to view if they describe research that could change patient care. Also, clear titles and easy-to-follow summaries or videos may help people to find relevant articles and understand the main findings. It is important to explore ways to best share research with all those whose lives it may affect.

Addressing the need for patient-friendly medical communications: adaptation of the 2019 recommendations for the management of MPS VI and MPS IVA

BACKGROUND

Patients are the most important stakeholders in the care of any disease and have an educational need to learn about their condition and the treatment they should receive. Considering this need for patient-focused materials, we present a directed approach for mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS) VI and MPS IVA, a pair of rare, inherited diseases that affects multiple organs and parts of the body. Independent guidelines on the treatment of these diseases were recently published, providing evidence- and expertise-driven recommendations to optimize patient management. However, while healthcare providers may have the training and knowledge to understand these guidelines, patients and their caregivers can find the technical content challenging. Hence, we aimed to develop plain language summaries (PLS) of the MPS VI and MPS IVA guidelines with patients as the primary audience.

RESULTS

A review of the guidelines by an expert team identified six domains of information relevant to patients: The multidisciplinary team, regular tests and check-ups, disease-modifying and supportive treatments, general anesthetics, ear-nose-throat/respiratory care, and surgeries. This information was adapted into a series of infographics specific to either MPS VI or MPS IVA, designed to appeal to patients and clearly present information in a concise manner.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of patient-friendly materials, like the infographics we have developed, has the potential to better inform patients and engage them in their care. We issue a "call to arms" to the medical community for the development of similar PLS materials in rare diseases intended to inform and empower patients.