Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2015

Open Access 01-11-2015 | Epidemiology

The readability of online breast cancer risk assessment tools

Authors: Sarah Cortez, Melissa Milbrandt, Kimberly Kaphingst, Aimee James, Graham Colditz

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Numerous breast cancer risk assessment tools that allow users to input personal risk information and obtain a personalized breast cancer risk estimate are available on the Internet. The goal of these tools is to increase screening awareness and identify modifiable health behaviors; however, the utility of this risk information is limited by the readability of the material. We undertook this study to assess the overall readability of breast cancer risk assessment tools and accompanying information, as well as to identify areas of suggested improvement. We searched for breast cancer risk assessment tools, using five search terms, on three search engines. All searches were performed on June 12, 2014. Sites that met inclusion criteria were then assessed for readability using the suitability assessment of materials (SAM) and the SMOG readability formula (July 1, 2014–January 31, 2015). The primary outcomes are the frequency distribution of overall SAM readability category (superior, adequate, or not suitable) and mean SMOG reading grade level. The search returned 42 sites were eligible for assessment, only 9 (21.4 %) of which achieved an overall SAM superior rating, and 27 (64.3 %) were deemed adequate. The average SMOG reading grade level was grade 12.1 (SD 1.6, range 9–15). The readability of breast cancer risk assessment tools and the sites that host them is an important barrier to risk communication. This study demonstrates that most breast cancer risk assessment tools are not accessible to individuals with limited health literacy skills. More importantly, this study identifies potential areas of improvement and has the potential to heighten a physician’s awareness of the Internet resources a patient might navigate in their quest for breast cancer risk information.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference American Cancer Society (2013) Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2013–2014. American Cancer Society, Inc., Atlanta American Cancer Society (2013) Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2013–2014. American Cancer Society, Inc., Atlanta
3.
go back to reference Hsieh CC, Trichopoulos D, Katsouyanni K, Yuasa S (1990) Age at menarche, age at menopause, height and obesity as risk factors for breast cancer: associations and interactions in an international case-control study. Int J Cancer J international du cancer 46 (5):796–800 Hsieh CC, Trichopoulos D, Katsouyanni K, Yuasa S (1990) Age at menarche, age at menopause, height and obesity as risk factors for breast cancer: associations and interactions in an international case-control study. Int J Cancer J international du cancer 46 (5):796–800
7.
go back to reference Berman ND, Sheridan SL, Donahue KE et al. (2011) Health Literacy Interventions and Outcomes: an updated systematic review. evidence report/technology assesment no. 199. (Prepared by RTI International–University of North Carolina evidence- based practice center under contract no. 290-2007-10056-I). AHRQ Publication Number 11- E006. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville Berman ND, Sheridan SL, Donahue KE et al. (2011) Health Literacy Interventions and Outcomes: an updated systematic review. evidence report/technology assesment no. 199. (Prepared by RTI International–University of North Carolina evidence- based practice center under contract no. 290-2007-10056-I). AHRQ Publication Number 11- E006. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville
8.
go back to reference Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, Paulsen C (2006) The Health literacy of America’s Adults: results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006–483). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, DC Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, Paulsen C (2006) The Health literacy of America’s Adults: results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006–483). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, DC
11.
go back to reference Brewer NT, Tzeng JP, Lillie SE, Edwards AS, Peppercorn JM, Rimer BK (2009) Health literacy and cancer risk perception: implications for genomic risk communication. Med Decis Mak 29(2):157–166. doi:10.1177/0272989x08327111 CrossRef Brewer NT, Tzeng JP, Lillie SE, Edwards AS, Peppercorn JM, Rimer BK (2009) Health literacy and cancer risk perception: implications for genomic risk communication. Med Decis Mak 29(2):157–166. doi:10.​1177/​0272989x08327111​ CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Implications of health literacy for public health: workshop summary (2014) The National Academies Press, Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC Implications of health literacy for public health: workshop summary (2014) The National Academies Press, Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC
13.
go back to reference Sharp LK, Zurawski JM, Roland PY, O’Toole C, Hines J (2002) Health literacy, cervical cancer risk factors, and distress in low-income African–American women seeking colposcopy. Ethn Dis 12(4):541–546PubMed Sharp LK, Zurawski JM, Roland PY, O’Toole C, Hines J (2002) Health literacy, cervical cancer risk factors, and distress in low-income African–American women seeking colposcopy. Ethn Dis 12(4):541–546PubMed
14.
15.
go back to reference Doak CC, Doak LG, Root JH (1996) Teaching patients with low literacy skills, 2nd edn. Lippincott, Philadelphia Doak CC, Doak LG, Root JH (1996) Teaching patients with low literacy skills, 2nd edn. Lippincott, Philadelphia
16.
go back to reference McLaughlin GH (1969) SMOG grading: a new readability formula. J Read 12(8):639–646 McLaughlin GH (1969) SMOG grading: a new readability formula. J Read 12(8):639–646
Metadata
Title
The readability of online breast cancer risk assessment tools
Authors
Sarah Cortez
Melissa Milbrandt
Kimberly Kaphingst
Aimee James
Graham Colditz
Publication date
01-11-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 1/2015
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3601-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2015 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine