Readability levels and thematic content analysis of online and printed lead poisoning informational materials.
Health communication
Informational materials
Lead poisoning
Readability levels
Thematic content analysis
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 10 2021
17 10 2021
Historique:
received:
29
06
2021
accepted:
27
09
2021
entrez:
18
10
2021
pubmed:
19
10
2021
medline:
3
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Lead poisoning prevention efforts include preparing and disseminating informational materials such as brochures and pamphlets to increase awareness of lead poisoning, lead exposures and lead poisoning prevention. However, studies have demonstrated that patient education materials for diseases and health conditions are prepared at a reading level that is higher than the recommended 7th-8th grade reading level. This study, therefore, aims to assess the reading levels of lead poisoning informational materials. Lead poisoning materials (N = 31) were accessed from three states; Michigan, New York and Pennsylvania. The readability levels of the materials were assessed using the Flesh Kincaid Grade Level readability test. The Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to determine if the readability levels differed between the materials obtained from the different states. Thematic content analyses were carried out to assess the inclusion of four themes; definition of lead poisoning, risk factors and exposures, testing and referral and prevention covering 12 subtopics. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to examine if there was a difference in the number of subtopics by readability level (dichotomized to >8th grade and < 8th grade). The median readability level of the informational materials was 6.7 (IQR: 5.1-8.1). However, there was variability in the readability levels of the materials (range 3.5 to 10.6); materials obtained from Michigan had the highest median reading level of 8.1 (IQR: 6.9-9.0) followed by Pennsylvania. Heterogeneity was observed in the content of the materials. Most of the materials (80%) from Michigan focused on water as a source of lead poisoning, whereas materials from New York and Pennsylvania focused on lead-based paint and other sources. The materials prepared at >8th grade reading level contained fewer topics than materials prepared at <8th grade reading level. We find that the materials were often prepared at reading levels lower than the recommended 8th grade reading level. However, there is variability in the reading levels and in the content of the materials. While the materials met the general readability guidelines, they did not necessarily meet the needs of specific groups, especially groups at risk.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Lead poisoning prevention efforts include preparing and disseminating informational materials such as brochures and pamphlets to increase awareness of lead poisoning, lead exposures and lead poisoning prevention. However, studies have demonstrated that patient education materials for diseases and health conditions are prepared at a reading level that is higher than the recommended 7th-8th grade reading level. This study, therefore, aims to assess the reading levels of lead poisoning informational materials.
METHODS
Lead poisoning materials (N = 31) were accessed from three states; Michigan, New York and Pennsylvania. The readability levels of the materials were assessed using the Flesh Kincaid Grade Level readability test. The Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to determine if the readability levels differed between the materials obtained from the different states. Thematic content analyses were carried out to assess the inclusion of four themes; definition of lead poisoning, risk factors and exposures, testing and referral and prevention covering 12 subtopics. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to examine if there was a difference in the number of subtopics by readability level (dichotomized to >8th grade and < 8th grade).
RESULTS
The median readability level of the informational materials was 6.7 (IQR: 5.1-8.1). However, there was variability in the readability levels of the materials (range 3.5 to 10.6); materials obtained from Michigan had the highest median reading level of 8.1 (IQR: 6.9-9.0) followed by Pennsylvania. Heterogeneity was observed in the content of the materials. Most of the materials (80%) from Michigan focused on water as a source of lead poisoning, whereas materials from New York and Pennsylvania focused on lead-based paint and other sources. The materials prepared at >8th grade reading level contained fewer topics than materials prepared at <8th grade reading level.
CONCLUSIONS
We find that the materials were often prepared at reading levels lower than the recommended 8th grade reading level. However, there is variability in the reading levels and in the content of the materials. While the materials met the general readability guidelines, they did not necessarily meet the needs of specific groups, especially groups at risk.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34657616
doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11944-w
pii: 10.1186/s12889-021-11944-w
pmc: PMC8520609
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1874Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Jun 27;16(13):
pubmed: 31252687
J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2018 Mar 20;2(3):e002
pubmed: 30211380
J Community Health. 2017 Dec;42(6):1255-1266
pubmed: 28528525
JAMA. 2017 Mar 28;317(12):1244-1251
pubmed: 28350927
Am Fam Physician. 1993 Jan;47(1):113-20
pubmed: 7678185
Adv Prev Med. 2017;2017:9780317
pubmed: 28656111
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jan 14;18(2):
pubmed: 33466621
Cureus. 2019 Mar 6;11(3):e4184
pubmed: 31106084
Respir Care. 2008 Oct;53(10):1310-5
pubmed: 18811992
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018 Nov 23;67(46):1290-1294
pubmed: 30462630
Pediatrics. 2007 Mar;119(3):e650-8
pubmed: 17332184
BMC Oral Health. 2018 May 10;18(1):81
pubmed: 29747625
J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Sep;27(9):1165-70
pubmed: 22528620
Environ Health. 2015 Apr 07;14:21
pubmed: 25889033
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2019 Jan/Feb;25 Suppl 1, Lead Poisoning Prevention:S63-S70
pubmed: 30507772
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1998 Dec;152(12):1213-8
pubmed: 9856432
Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2006 Feb;79(2):165-8
pubmed: 16217677
Health Educ Res. 2008 Jun;23(3):414-26
pubmed: 17586587
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004 Jun 18;53(23):509-11
pubmed: 15201845
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013 Dec;131(12):1610-6
pubmed: 24178035
Am J Public Health. 1996 Oct;86(10):1460-3
pubmed: 8876521
Matern Child Health J. 2009 Jan;13(1):40-7
pubmed: 17963029
Pediatrics. 1994 Mar;93(3):460-8
pubmed: 8115206
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004 Jul 9;53(26):584-6
pubmed: 15241301
Am J Surg. 2016 Mar;211(3):631-6
pubmed: 26794665
Environ Health Perspect. 2012 Feb;120(2):309-15
pubmed: 22001644
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004 Jul 9;53(26):582-4
pubmed: 15241300
J Appl Psychol. 1948 Jun;32(3):221-33
pubmed: 18867058
Diabet Med. 1993 Nov;10(9):847-50
pubmed: 8281731
Environ Health Perspect. 2008 Oct;116(10):1285-93
pubmed: 18941567
N Engl J Med. 2016 Mar 24;374(12):1101-3
pubmed: 26863114