Readability of consumer health information on the internet

A comparison of U.S. government-funded and commercially funded websites

Zara Risoldi Cochrane, Philip Gregory, Amy Wilson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The Internet has become an extremely prevalent means of communicating health information to consumers. Guidelines for selecting reliable health information websites give preference to U.S. government sites over commercially funded sites. However, these websites are not useful to consumers unless they are able to read and understand them. The authors objective was to compare the readability of Internet health information intended for consumers found on U.S. government-funded websites versus that found on commercially funded websites. Consumer health websites were identified through a systematic Internet search. Webpages for 10 common health topics were extracted from each website. Readability of webpages was determined by 3 validated measures: Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level, and SMOG Formula. Mean readability of government-funded and commercially funded websites was compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Commercially funded websites were significantly more difficult to read as measured by Flesch Reading Ease (49.7 vs. 55.6 for government-funded sites, p=.002) and Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level (10.1 vs. 9.3, p=.012). There was no significant difference according to SMOG Formula (12.8 vs. 13.2, p=.150). The overall readability of Internet health information intended for consumers was poor. Efforts should be made to ensure that health information communicated via the Internet is easy for consumers to read and understand.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1003-1010
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Health Communication
Volume17
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2012

Fingerprint

Consumer Health Information
consumer information
health information
Internet
website
Websites
Health
Reading
Nonparametric Statistics
Guidelines
health

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health(social science)
  • Library and Information Sciences
  • Communication

Cite this

Readability of consumer health information on the internet : A comparison of U.S. government-funded and commercially funded websites. / Risoldi Cochrane, Zara; Gregory, Philip; Wilson, Amy.

In: Journal of Health Communication, Vol. 17, No. 9, 01.10.2012, p. 1003-1010.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6311e51d386840e381b794d9258a2f8b,
title = "Readability of consumer health information on the internet: A comparison of U.S. government-funded and commercially funded websites",
abstract = "The Internet has become an extremely prevalent means of communicating health information to consumers. Guidelines for selecting reliable health information websites give preference to U.S. government sites over commercially funded sites. However, these websites are not useful to consumers unless they are able to read and understand them. The authors objective was to compare the readability of Internet health information intended for consumers found on U.S. government-funded websites versus that found on commercially funded websites. Consumer health websites were identified through a systematic Internet search. Webpages for 10 common health topics were extracted from each website. Readability of webpages was determined by 3 validated measures: Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level, and SMOG Formula. Mean readability of government-funded and commercially funded websites was compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Commercially funded websites were significantly more difficult to read as measured by Flesch Reading Ease (49.7 vs. 55.6 for government-funded sites, p=.002) and Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level (10.1 vs. 9.3, p=.012). There was no significant difference according to SMOG Formula (12.8 vs. 13.2, p=.150). The overall readability of Internet health information intended for consumers was poor. Efforts should be made to ensure that health information communicated via the Internet is easy for consumers to read and understand.",
author = "{Risoldi Cochrane}, Zara and Philip Gregory and Amy Wilson",
year = "2012",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/10810730.2011.650823",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "1003--1010",
journal = "Journal of Health Communication",
issn = "1081-0730",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Readability of consumer health information on the internet

T2 - A comparison of U.S. government-funded and commercially funded websites

AU - Risoldi Cochrane, Zara

AU - Gregory, Philip

AU - Wilson, Amy

PY - 2012/10/1

Y1 - 2012/10/1

N2 - The Internet has become an extremely prevalent means of communicating health information to consumers. Guidelines for selecting reliable health information websites give preference to U.S. government sites over commercially funded sites. However, these websites are not useful to consumers unless they are able to read and understand them. The authors objective was to compare the readability of Internet health information intended for consumers found on U.S. government-funded websites versus that found on commercially funded websites. Consumer health websites were identified through a systematic Internet search. Webpages for 10 common health topics were extracted from each website. Readability of webpages was determined by 3 validated measures: Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level, and SMOG Formula. Mean readability of government-funded and commercially funded websites was compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Commercially funded websites were significantly more difficult to read as measured by Flesch Reading Ease (49.7 vs. 55.6 for government-funded sites, p=.002) and Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level (10.1 vs. 9.3, p=.012). There was no significant difference according to SMOG Formula (12.8 vs. 13.2, p=.150). The overall readability of Internet health information intended for consumers was poor. Efforts should be made to ensure that health information communicated via the Internet is easy for consumers to read and understand.

AB - The Internet has become an extremely prevalent means of communicating health information to consumers. Guidelines for selecting reliable health information websites give preference to U.S. government sites over commercially funded sites. However, these websites are not useful to consumers unless they are able to read and understand them. The authors objective was to compare the readability of Internet health information intended for consumers found on U.S. government-funded websites versus that found on commercially funded websites. Consumer health websites were identified through a systematic Internet search. Webpages for 10 common health topics were extracted from each website. Readability of webpages was determined by 3 validated measures: Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level, and SMOG Formula. Mean readability of government-funded and commercially funded websites was compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Commercially funded websites were significantly more difficult to read as measured by Flesch Reading Ease (49.7 vs. 55.6 for government-funded sites, p=.002) and Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level (10.1 vs. 9.3, p=.012). There was no significant difference according to SMOG Formula (12.8 vs. 13.2, p=.150). The overall readability of Internet health information intended for consumers was poor. Efforts should be made to ensure that health information communicated via the Internet is easy for consumers to read and understand.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84867758109&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84867758109&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10810730.2011.650823

DO - 10.1080/10810730.2011.650823

M3 - Article

VL - 17

SP - 1003

EP - 1010

JO - Journal of Health Communication

JF - Journal of Health Communication

SN - 1081-0730

IS - 9

ER -