The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Readability of Pediatric Patient Education Materials on the World Wide Web
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Literacy is a national and international problem. Studies have shown the readability of adult and pediatric patient education materials to be too high for average adults. Materials should be written at the 8th-grade level or lower. OBJECTIVE: To determine the general readability of pediatric patient education materials designed for adults on the World Wide Web (WWW). MATERIALS AND METHODS: GeneralPediatrics.com (http://www.generalpediatrics.com) is a digital library serving the medical information needs of pediatric health care providers, patients, and families. Documents from 100 different authoritative Web sites designed for laypersons were evaluated using a built-in computer software readability formula (Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid reading levels) and hand calculation methods (Fry Formula and SMOG methods). Analysis of variance and paired t tests determined significance. RESULTS: Eighty-nine documents constituted the final sample; they covered a wide spectrum of pediatric topics. The overall Flesch Reading Ease score was 57.0. The overall mean Fry Formula was 12.0 (12th grade, 0 months of schooling) and SMOG was 12.2. The overall Flesch-Kincaid grade level was significantly lower (P<.0001), at a mean of 7.1, when compared with the other 2 methods. All author and institution groups had an average reading level above 10.6 by the Fry Formula and SMOG methods. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric patient education materials on the WWW are not written at an appropriate reading level for the average adult. We propose that a practical reading level and how it was determined be included on all patient education materials on the WWW for general guidance in material selection. We discuss suggestions for improved readability of patient education materials.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Flesch, R. (1948) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0057532 · Cited by 5,391
Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne, Jr., Robert P., R., Richard L., C., & Brad, S. (1975) · doi:10.21236/ada006655 · Cited by 3,497
SMOG Grading - A New Readability Formula.
McLaughlin, G. H. (1969) · The Journal of Reading · Cited by 2,081
Nielsen, J. (1999) · University of Maribor digital library (University of Maribor) · Cited by 1,634
Teaching Patients with Low Literacy Skills
Doak, C. C., Doak, L. G., & Root, J. H. (1996) · American Journal of Nursing · doi:10.1097/00000446-199612000-00022 · Cited by 1,432
Accessibility of information on the web
Lawrence, S., & Giles, C. L. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/21987 · Cited by 1,349
Teaching patients with low literacy skills
(2001) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e518822004-001 · Cited by 1,229
Silberg, W. M. (1997) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.277.15.1244 · Cited by 1,151
Rating Health Information on the Internet: Navigating to Knowledge or to Babel?
Jadad, A. R., & Gagliardi, A. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.279.8.611 · Cited by 696
Impicciatore, P., Pandolfini, C., Casella, N., & Bonati, M. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.314.7098.1875 · Cited by 622
Cited by
Literacy and health outcomes: A systematic review of the literature
DeWalt, D. A., Berkman, N. D., Sheridan, S., Lohr, K. N., & Pignone, M. P. (2004) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.40153.x · Cited by 2,309
Eysenbach, G., Powell, J., Kuss, O., & Sa, E.-R. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.287.20.2691 · Cited by 1,871
Assessing Readability of Patient Education Materials: Current Role in Orthopaedics
Badarudeen, S., & Sabharwal, S. (2010) · Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research · doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1380-y · Cited by 657
Friedman, D. B., & Hoffman-Goetz, L. (2006) · Health Education & Behavior · doi:10.1177/1090198105277329 · Cited by 517
McCray, A. T. (2004) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1687 · Cited by 371
Metadata
- Authors
- D'Alessandro, D. M., Kingsley, P., & Johnson-West, J.
- Venue
- Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2001-07-01
- Volume
- 155
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 807
- ISSN
- 1072-4710 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2169513109
- Cited by
- 287
- References
- 27
- FWCI
- 23.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Readability of Pediatric Patient Education Materials on the World Wide Web. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archpedi.155.7.807
- The paper
- D'Alessandro, D. M., Kingsley, P., & Johnson-West, J. (2001). The Readability of Pediatric Patient Education Materials on the World Wide Web. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.155.7.807
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.