BMC Public Health (Oct 2021)

Readability levels and thematic content analysis of online and printed lead poisoning informational materials

  • Harriet Okatch,
  • Ebony Pitts,
  • Emily Ritchey,
  • Kylie Givler,
  • Madeline Kuon

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11944-w
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 21, no. 1
pp. 1 – 8

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Lead poisoning prevention efforts include preparing and disseminating informational materials such as brochures and pamphlets to increase awareness of lead poisoning, lead exposures and lead poisoning prevention. However, studies have demonstrated that patient education materials for diseases and health conditions are prepared at a reading level that is higher than the recommended 7th–8th grade reading level. This study, therefore, aims to assess the reading levels of lead poisoning informational materials. Methods Lead poisoning materials (N = 31) were accessed from three states; Michigan, New York and Pennsylvania. The readability levels of the materials were assessed using the Flesh Kincaid Grade Level readability test. The Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to determine if the readability levels differed between the materials obtained from the different states. Thematic content analyses were carried out to assess the inclusion of four themes; definition of lead poisoning, risk factors and exposures, testing and referral and prevention covering 12 subtopics. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to examine if there was a difference in the number of subtopics by readability level (dichotomized to >8th grade and 8th grade reading level contained fewer topics than materials prepared at <8th grade reading level. Conclusions We find that the materials were often prepared at reading levels lower than the recommended 8th grade reading level. However, there is variability in the reading levels and in the content of the materials. While the materials met the general readability guidelines, they did not necessarily meet the needs of specific groups, especially groups at risk.

Keywords