Trial lay summaries were not fit for purpose
Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved..
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To establish if trial lay summaries are suitable for lay readers.
METHODS: A random sample of 60 randomized controlled trial (RCT) reports (15%) from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Journals Library, UK, were selected from 407 available ones. We extracted the lay summary and determined the readability using the previously validated Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simplified Measure of Gobbledegook (SMOG), Gunning Fog (GF), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), and Automated Readability Index (ARI) readability scales. This provided us with a reading age. We also assessed the compatibility of the lay summaries with the Plain English UK Guidelines and the National Adult Literacy Agency Guidelines, Ireland.
RESULTS: No lay summary met the recommended reading age for health care information of 11-12 years. None of them were considered "easy" to read, in fact over 85% were considered "difficult" to read.
CONCLUSION: The lay summary is a key document for disseminating trial results to a broad population who may not necessarily have the medical or technical jargon to read a trial report. Its importance cannot be overstated. Assessing readability in conjunction with plain language guidelines is relatively easy and therefore an immediate change to practice is feasible. However, since specific skills are required to write lay summaries that meet the required standards, it is important that the need for such expertise is recognized and supported by research funders.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:156 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of clinical epidemiology - 156(2023) vom: 15. Apr., Seite 105-112 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Shiely, Frances [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Communication |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 15.05.2023 Date Revised 03.06.2023 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.02.023 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM353742228 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM353742228 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226060720.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.02.023 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1179.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM353742228 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)36868328 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S0895-4356(23)00043-4 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Shiely, Frances |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Trial lay summaries were not fit for purpose |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 15.05.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 03.06.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To establish if trial lay summaries are suitable for lay readers | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: A random sample of 60 randomized controlled trial (RCT) reports (15%) from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Journals Library, UK, were selected from 407 available ones. We extracted the lay summary and determined the readability using the previously validated Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simplified Measure of Gobbledegook (SMOG), Gunning Fog (GF), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), and Automated Readability Index (ARI) readability scales. This provided us with a reading age. We also assessed the compatibility of the lay summaries with the Plain English UK Guidelines and the National Adult Literacy Agency Guidelines, Ireland | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: No lay summary met the recommended reading age for health care information of 11-12 years. None of them were considered "easy" to read, in fact over 85% were considered "difficult" to read | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: The lay summary is a key document for disseminating trial results to a broad population who may not necessarily have the medical or technical jargon to read a trial report. Its importance cannot be overstated. Assessing readability in conjunction with plain language guidelines is relatively easy and therefore an immediate change to practice is feasible. However, since specific skills are required to write lay summaries that meet the required standards, it is important that the need for such expertise is recognized and supported by research funders | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Randomized Controlled Trial | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Communication | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Lay summaries | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Patient and public involvement | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Plain English | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Readability | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Trials | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Daly, Anna |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of clinical epidemiology |d 1991 |g 156(2023) vom: 15. Apr., Seite 105-112 |w (DE-627)NLM012614815 |x 1878-5921 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:156 |g year:2023 |g day:15 |g month:04 |g pages:105-112 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.02.023 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 156 |j 2023 |b 15 |c 04 |h 105-112 | ||