Health Information on Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis From Search Engines and Twitter: Readability Analysis.

HIV PrEP Twitter electronic health education health education materials health information health literacy infection pre-exposure prophylaxis prophylaxis readability

Journal

JMIR public health and surveillance
ISSN: 2369-2960
Titre abrégé: JMIR Public Health Surveill
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101669345

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 09 2023
Historique:
received: 01 05 2023
accepted: 26 06 2023
revised: 21 06 2023
medline: 5 9 2023
pubmed: 4 9 2023
entrez: 4 9 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is proven to prevent HIV infection. However, PrEP uptake to date has been limited and inequitable. Analyzing the readability of existing PrEP-related information is important to understand the potential impact of available PrEP information on PrEP uptake and identify opportunities to improve PrEP-related education and communication. We examined the readability of web-based PrEP information identified using search engines and on Twitter. We investigated the readability of web-based PrEP documents, stratified by how the PrEP document was obtained on the web, information source, document format and communication method, PrEP modality, and intended audience. Web-based PrEP information in English was systematically identified using search engines and the Twitter API. We manually verified and categorized results and described the method used to obtain information, information source, document format and communication method, PrEP modality, and intended audience. Documents were converted to plain text for the analysis and readability of the collected documents was assessed using 4 readability indices. We conducted pairwise comparisons of readability based on how the PrEP document was obtained on the web, information source, document format, communication method, PrEP modality, and intended audience, then adjusted for multiple comparisons. A total of 463 documents were identified. Overall, the readability of web-based PrEP information was at a higher level (10.2-grade reading level) than what is recommended for health information provided to the general public (ninth-grade reading level, as suggested by the Department of Health and Human Services). Brochures (n=33, 7% of all identified resources) were the only type of PrEP materials that achieved the target of ninth-grade reading level. Web-based PrEP information is often written at a complex level for potential and current PrEP users to understand. This may hinder PrEP uptake for some people who would benefit from it. The readability of PrEP-related information found on the web should be improved to align more closely with health communication guidelines for reading level to improve access to this important health information, facilitate informed decisions by those with a need for PrEP, and realize national prevention goals for PrEP uptake and reducing new HIV infections in the United States.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is proven to prevent HIV infection. However, PrEP uptake to date has been limited and inequitable. Analyzing the readability of existing PrEP-related information is important to understand the potential impact of available PrEP information on PrEP uptake and identify opportunities to improve PrEP-related education and communication.
OBJECTIVE
We examined the readability of web-based PrEP information identified using search engines and on Twitter. We investigated the readability of web-based PrEP documents, stratified by how the PrEP document was obtained on the web, information source, document format and communication method, PrEP modality, and intended audience.
METHODS
Web-based PrEP information in English was systematically identified using search engines and the Twitter API. We manually verified and categorized results and described the method used to obtain information, information source, document format and communication method, PrEP modality, and intended audience. Documents were converted to plain text for the analysis and readability of the collected documents was assessed using 4 readability indices. We conducted pairwise comparisons of readability based on how the PrEP document was obtained on the web, information source, document format, communication method, PrEP modality, and intended audience, then adjusted for multiple comparisons.
RESULTS
A total of 463 documents were identified. Overall, the readability of web-based PrEP information was at a higher level (10.2-grade reading level) than what is recommended for health information provided to the general public (ninth-grade reading level, as suggested by the Department of Health and Human Services). Brochures (n=33, 7% of all identified resources) were the only type of PrEP materials that achieved the target of ninth-grade reading level.
CONCLUSIONS
Web-based PrEP information is often written at a complex level for potential and current PrEP users to understand. This may hinder PrEP uptake for some people who would benefit from it. The readability of PrEP-related information found on the web should be improved to align more closely with health communication guidelines for reading level to improve access to this important health information, facilitate informed decisions by those with a need for PrEP, and realize national prevention goals for PrEP uptake and reducing new HIV infections in the United States.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37665621
pii: v9i1e48630
doi: 10.2196/48630
pmc: PMC10507523
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e48630

Informations de copyright

©Albert Park, Fatima Sayed, Patrick Robinson, Latesha Elopre, Yaorong Ge, Shaoyu Li, Christian Grov, Patrick Sean Sullivan. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org), 04.09.2023.

Références

Am J Public Health. 1989 Feb;79(2):204-6
pubmed: 2913844
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2017 Nov/Dec;23(6):577-580
pubmed: 28166175
PLoS Med. 2013;10(9):e1001511
pubmed: 24058300
J Biomed Inform. 2012 Dec;45(6):1151-63
pubmed: 22925723
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001 Jul;155(7):807-12
pubmed: 11434848
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Oct;5(10):
pubmed: 33097547
Tob Control. 2011 Sep;20(5):327-37
pubmed: 21606180
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019 Aug 21;264:959-963
pubmed: 31438066
AMRL TR. 1967 May;:1-14
pubmed: 5302480
Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Aug;80(2):284-90
pubmed: 24674352
Lancet. 2013 Jun 15;381(9883):2083-90
pubmed: 23769234
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008 May;466(5):1245-50
pubmed: 18324452
J Med Internet Res. 2011 Dec 02;13(4):e104
pubmed: 22138127
Sex Transm Dis. 2015 Feb;42(2):88-92
pubmed: 25585067
J Health Commun. 2012;17(9):1003-10
pubmed: 22512714
Am Psychol. 2019 May-Jun;74(4):474-483
pubmed: 30299121
Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2022 Feb 1;35(1):1-8
pubmed: 34879049
BMC Public Health. 2012 Mar 26;12:242
pubmed: 22449137
Health Lit Res Pract. 2019 Apr;3(2):e74-e80
pubmed: 31049489
J Behav Med. 2014 Apr;37(2):218-33
pubmed: 23188480
JAMA. 2019 Mar 5;321(9):844-845
pubmed: 30730529
Ann Epidemiol. 2018 Dec;28(12):841-849
pubmed: 29983236
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2019 Jan 25;76(3):182-186
pubmed: 31408087
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2019;15(7-8):1505-1507
pubmed: 30024828
Am J Public Health. 1992 Mar;82(3):464
pubmed: 1536374
Arch Sex Behav. 2021 May;50(4):1729-1742
pubmed: 33954824
Pediatrics. 2013 Jan;131(1):e116-26
pubmed: 23209106
Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2019 Aug;16(4):259-269
pubmed: 31177363
J Health Commun. 2016;21(4):439-56
pubmed: 26953782
Respir Care. 2008 Oct;53(10):1310-5
pubmed: 18811992
Public Health. 2020 May;182:53-55
pubmed: 32171091
PLoS One. 2017 Aug 21;12(8):e0183521
pubmed: 28827821
Semin Oncol Nurs. 2011 Aug;27(3):169-82
pubmed: 21783008
J Hand Surg Am. 2022 Feb;47(2):186.e1-186.e8
pubmed: 34023192
N Engl J Med. 2015 Dec 3;373(23):2281-7
pubmed: 26624243
JAMA Intern Med. 2013 Jul 8;173(13):1257-9
pubmed: 23689468
Ann Epidemiol. 2018 Dec;28(12):833-840
pubmed: 30037634
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2017 Jan 06;3(1):e1
pubmed: 28062390
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017 Jan;156(1):96-102
pubmed: 28045633
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2020 Sep/Oct;26(5):489-492
pubmed: 32732723
PLoS One. 2020 Jan 13;15(1):e0227632
pubmed: 31931514
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Aug 19;22(8):e19996
pubmed: 32750004

Auteurs

Albert Park (A)

Department of Software and Information Systems, University of North Carolina Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, United States.

Fatima Sayed (F)

Department of Software and Information Systems, University of North Carolina Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, United States.

Patrick Robinson (P)

Department of Public Health Sciences, University of North Carolina Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, United States.

Latesha Elopre (L)

Division of Infectious Disease, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, United States.

Yaorong Ge (Y)

Department of Software and Information Systems, University of North Carolina Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, United States.

Shaoyu Li (S)

Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of North Carolina Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, United States.

Christian Grov (C)

Department of Community Health and Social Sciences, City University of New York, New York City, NY, United States.

Patrick Sean Sullivan (PS)

Department of Epidemiology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH