Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Readability of patient education materials in hand and wrist surgery: Can ChatGPT make a difference?
0
Zitationen
4
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
The internet is a common resource among orthopaedic patients. Many orthopaedic Patient Education Materials (PEMs) are written above the recommended 6th-grade reading level. This study aims to evaluate the readability of online hand and wrist PEMs and determine whether AI can enhance their readability. 135 hand and wrist surgery PEMs were identified from the British Society for Surgery of the Hand, the American Society for Surgery of the Hand, and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons websites. Readability was assessed using eight formulae. The mean Reading Grade Level (RGL) was compared to the 6th and 8th-grade reading levels. 27 articles were input into ChatGPT with the following command: “Rewrite the following patient education materials using a 6th-grade reading level. The material should be ready to publish in the patient education section of a healthcare website.” The readability was then reassessed. The mean RGL of the 135 PEMs was 9.89 (range = 7.2-15), significantly higher than the 6th-grade level by 3.89 grade levels (95% CI, 3.7 -8; P<0.001) and the 8th-grade level by 1.89 grade levels (95% CI, 1.7 – 2.08; P<0.001). The 27 pre-simplification articles had a mean RGL of 10.4. The ChatGPT-simplified PEMs’ mean RGL was 8.54, exceeding the requested 6th-grade level by 2.54 grade levels (95% CI, 2.13 – 2.96; P<0.001). The simplified articles’ mean RGL was significantly lower than the original articles (95% CI, 1.2 – 2.49; p<0.001). Hand and wrist PEMs from leading healthcare organisations are written above the recommended levels. ChatGPT shows potential as an accessible tool to improve readability. Integrating AI into the creation and review process of PEMs could be a valuable strategy for improving readability.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Improving the Quality of Web Surveys: The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES)
2004 · 6.074 Zit.
The content validity index: Are you sure you know what's being reported? critique and recommendations
2006 · 6.014 Zit.
Health literacy and public health: A systematic review and integration of definitions and models
2012 · 5.773 Zit.
Low Health Literacy and Health Outcomes: An Updated Systematic Review
2011 · 5.173 Zit.
Health literacy as a public health goal: a challenge for contemporary health education and communication strategies into the 21st century
2000 · 4.903 Zit.