Skip to content
2000
Volume 3, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 2542-579X
  • E-ISSN: 2542-5803

Abstract

Background

Dental patients may seek and read online patient education materials pertaining to dental radiology.

Objective

The objective of this study was to quantitatively evaluate the readability of online patient education materials pertaining to dental radiology.

Methods

All patient education articles available in 2021 from professional societies and authoritative bodies related to dental radiology were reviewed. Each article was assessed using the Gunning Fog index, Coleman Liau index, Flesch-Kincaid Grade level, Automated Readability index (ARI), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) and Flesch Reading Ease score. Contextual information was recorded in terms of the perspective from which the webpage was written (first, second, or third-person perspective), modalities mentioned (bitewing, periapical, occlusal, panoramic, cephalometric, or cone beam [CB] CT/CT), any radioprotection measures explained (for general, pregnancy, or children), and indications of imaging mentioned.

Results

Nine relevant webpages were identified. None of the major dental radiology associations (except the United States one) provided such online information. All but one required about a tenth-grade reading level to understand the content easily.

Conclusion

None of the webpages fulfilled the recommendations from the National Institute of Health and the American Medical Association of being written below a seventh-grade level. More online patient education materials for dental radiology were recommended, and they should be written in a more easily understood way.

© 2021 Bentham Science Publishers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X03666210728141256
2021-07-28
2025-09-04

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X03666210728141256
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. HansberryD.R. D’AngeloM. WhiteM.D. PrabhuA.V. CoxM. AgarwalN. DeshmukhS. Quantitative analysis of the level of readability of online emergency radiology-based patient education resources.Emerg. Radiol.201825214715210.1007/s10140‑017‑1566‑729143222
     [Google Scholar]
  2. McMullanM. Patients using the Internet to obtain health information: How this affects the patient-health professional relationship.Patient Educ. Couns.2006631-2242810.1016/j.pec.2005.10.00616406474
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BangeM. HuhE. NovinS.A. HuiF.K. YiP.H. Readability of patient education materials from RadiologyInfo.org: Has there been Progress over the past 5 years?AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.2019213487587910.2214/AJR.18.2104731386570
     [Google Scholar]
  4. ByunJ. GoldenD.W. Readability of patient education materials from professional societies in radiation oncology: Are we meeting the national standard?Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys.20159151108110910.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.12.03525832701
     [Google Scholar]
  5. HansberryD.R. JohnA. JohnE. AgarwalN. GonzalesS.F. BakerS.R. A critical review of the readability of online patient education resources from RadiologyInfo.Org.AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.2014202356657510.2214/AJR.13.1122324555593
     [Google Scholar]
  6. HansberryD.R. RamchandT. PatelS. KrausC. JungJ. AgarwalN. GonzalesS.F. BakerS.R. Are we failing to communicate? Internet-based patient education materials and radiation safety.Eur. J. Radiol.20148391698170210.1016/j.ejrad.2014.04.01324968965
     [Google Scholar]
  7. PrabhuA.V. DonovanA.L. CrihalmeanuT. HansberryD.R. AgarwalN. BeriwalS. KaleH. HellerM. Radiology online patient education materials provided by major university hospitals: Do they conform to NIH and AMA guidelines?Curr. Probl. Diagn. Radiol.2018472757910.1067/j.cpradiol.2017.05.00728669431
     [Google Scholar]
  8. PrabhuA.V. HansberryD.R. AgarwalN. ClumpD.A. HeronD.E. Radiation oncology and online patient education materials: deviating from NIH and AMA recommendations.Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys.201696352152810.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.06.244927681748
     [Google Scholar]
  9. YiP.H. YiM.M. NguyenJ.C. Readability of online information related to pediatric radiation safety from societal websites.AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.201821151128113410.2214/AJR.17.1929930240293
     [Google Scholar]
  10. YeungA.W.K. JacobsR. BornsteinM.M. Novel low-dose protocols using cone beam computed tomography in dental medicine: A review focusing on indications, limitations, and future possibilities.Clin. Oral Investig.20192362573258110.1007/s00784‑019‑02907‑y31025192
     [Google Scholar]
  11. YeungA.W.K. GotoT.K. LeungW.K. Readability of the 100 most-cited neuroimaging papers assessed by common readability formulae.Front. Hum. Neurosci.20181230810.3389/fnhum.2018.0030830158861
     [Google Scholar]
  12. YiP.H. GantaA. HusseinK.I. FrankR.M. JawaA. Readability of arthroscopy-related patient education materials from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and Arthroscopy Association of North America Web sites.Arthroscopy20132961108111210.1016/j.arthro.2013.03.00323726111
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Al FalehW. Bin MubayrikA. Al DosaryS. AlmthenH. AlmatrafiR. Public Perception and Viewpoints of Dental Radiograph Prescriptions and Dentists’ Safety Protection Practice.Clin. Cosmet. Investig. Dent.20201253353910.2147/CCIDE.S28185133235512
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X03666210728141256
Loading
Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Dental Radiology
Curr. Dentistry 3, 41 (2021); https://doi.org/10.2174/2542579X03666210728141256
/content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X03666210728141256
/content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X03666210728141256
Loading

Data & Media loading...


  • Article Type:     Research Article
Keyword(s): dental radiology; knowledge exchange; Patient education; radioprotection; readability; website

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test