
pmid: 25850755
This pilot project assessed the effectiveness of training health professionals in (1) readability assessment of written health materials, (2) plain language editing, and (3) formatting materials so they are easy to understand and use.Over six semesters, five students participated in the project. Students were trained to assess document readability, confirm and interpret readability results and "stamp" the documents with results. Students then edited documents under supervision, via revised documents were re-assessed for readability and approved. Training was assessed through readability score comparison and exit interviews with students.Most original readability scores were 10th grade to college level. After editing, the average reading level of 73% was 6th grade or better. Students and supervisor rated skill levels as "proficient" at the end of the semester.To address the gap between document reading level and patients' reading ability, health documents should be assessed and edited for plain language. Working with patient documents from various health fields, our program effectively trained health professions students in these skills.Training health professions students in readability assessment and plain language editing can reduce literacy demands on patients and address the need for professionals with these skills.
Adult, Male, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Teaching Materials, Writing, Pilot Projects, Health Literacy, Patient Education as Topic, Reading, Health Occupations, Humans, Female, Educational Measurement, Comprehension, Students, Language
Adult, Male, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Teaching Materials, Writing, Pilot Projects, Health Literacy, Patient Education as Topic, Reading, Health Occupations, Humans, Female, Educational Measurement, Comprehension, Students, Language
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 30 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
