ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2023
Comprehensiveness of online sources for patient education on hereditary hearing impairment.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The readability of total elbow arthroplasty educational materials.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026Article
- Comprehensiveness, quality, and readability of non-invasive prenatal testing information on Japanese medical institution websites.PEC innovation · 2026Article
- Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Endoscopic Spine Surgery.Spine surgery and related research · 2026Article
- Readability of patient education materials for lumbar disc replacement.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- Comprehensiveness of online sources for patient education on otosclerosis.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Article
- Evaluating ChatGPT-4's performance as a digital health advisor for otosclerosis surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The present study aimed at investigating the readability of online sources on hereditary hearing impairment (HHI). Methods: In August 2022, the search terms "hereditary hearing impairment", "genetic deafness", hereditary hearing loss", and "sensorineural hearing loss of genetic origin" were entered into the Google search engine and educational materials were determined. The first 50 websites were determined for each search. The double hits were removed and websites with only graphics or tables were excluded. Websites were categorized into either a professional society, a clinical practice or a general health information website. The readability tests to evaluate the websites included: Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid grade level, Gunning-Fog Index, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, Coleman-Liau Index, Automated Readability Index. Results: Twentynine websites were included and categorized as from 4 professional societies, 11 from clinical practices and 14 providing general information. All analyzed websites required higher reading levels than sixth grade. On average 12-16 years of education is required to read and understand the websites focused on HHI. Although general health information websites have better readability, the difference was not statistically significant. Discussion: The readability scores of every type of online educational materials on HHI are above the recommended level indicating that not all patients and parents can comprehend the information they seek for on these websites.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.