Site icon Cancervoid Health

Linguistic assessment and readability of paediatric dental patient education materials: an exploratory study

Linguistic assessment and readability of paediatric dental patient education materials: an exploratory study
  • Lipstein E A, Brinkman W B, Britto M T. What is known about parents’ treatment decisions? A narrative review of paediatric decision making. Med Decis Making 2012; 32: 246–258.

  • National Institutes of Health. Current bibliographies in medicine. 2000. Available at www.nlm.nih.gov/archive/20061214/pubs/cbm/hliteracy.pdf (accessed 16 December 2024).

  • Sanders L M, Federico S, Klass P, Abrams M A, Dreyer B. Literacy and child health – a systematic review. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2009; 163: 131–140.

  • Zaidman E A, Scott K M, Hahn D, Bennett P, Caldwell P H Y. Impact of parental health literacy on the health outcomes of children with chronic disease globally: a systematic review. J Paediatr Child Health 2023; 59: 12–31.

  • Firmino R T, Ferreira F M, Martins C C, Granville-Garcia A F, Fraiz F C, Paiva S M. Is parental oral health literacy a predictor of children’s oral health outcomes? Systematic review of the literature. Int J Paediat Dent 2018; DOI: 10.1111/ipd.12378.

  • Jackson R. Parental health literacy and children’s dental health: implications for the future. Pediatr Dent 2006; 28: 72–75.

  • Hendrickson R L, Huebner C E, Riedy C A. Readability of paediatric health materials for preventive dental care. BMC Oral Health 2006; 6: 14.

  • Vishnevetsky J, Walters C B, Tan K S. Interrater reliability of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). Patient Educ Counsel 2018; 101: 490–496.

  • Nash E, Bickerstaff M, Chetwynd A J, Hawcutt D B, Oni L. The readability of parent information leaflets in paediatric studies. Pediatr Res 2023; 94: 1166–1171.

  • Ley P, Florio T. The use of readability formulas in health care. Psychol Health Med 1996; 1: 7–28.

  • Leung J-Y, Riordain R N, Porter S. Readability and quality of online information regarding dental treatment for patients with ischaemic heart disease. Br Dent J 2020; 228: 609–614.

  • Alexander R E. Readability of published dental educational materials. J Am Dent Assoc 2000; 131: 937–942.

  • Arora A, Lam A S F, Karami Z, Do L G, Harris M F. How readable are Australian paediatric oral health education materials? BMC Oral Health 2014; 14: 111.

  • Amini H, Casamassimo P S, Lin H L, Hayes J R. Readability of the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry patient education materials. Pediatr Dent 2007; 29: 431–435.

  • Shoemaker S J, Wolf M S, Brach C. Development of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT): a new measure of understandability and actionability for print and audiovisual patient information. Patient Educ Counsel 2014; 96: 395–403.

  • Srivastava S B. Language: a powerful tool in promoting health behaviours. Am J Lifestyle Med 2019; 13: 359–361.

  • Puhl R, Peterson J L, Luedicke J. Motivating or stigmatizing? Public perceptions of weight-related language used by health providers. Int J Obes 2013; 37: 612–619.

  • Granello D H, Gibbs T A. The power of language and labels: ‘the mentally ill’ versus ‘people with mental illnesses’. J Couns Dev 2016; 94: 31–40.

  • Boyd R L, Ashokkumar A, Seraj S, Pennebaker J W. The development and psychometric properties of LIWC-22. 2022. Available at (accessed 16 December 2024).

  • LIWC-22. Introducing LIWC-22: a new set of text analysis tools at your fingertips. Available at (accessed 16 December 2024).

  • Banić A, Fidahić M, Šuto J et al. Conclusiveness, linguistic characteristics and readability of Cochrane plain language summaries of intervention reviews: a cross-sectional study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2022; 22: 240.

  • Dillner L. Is Wikipedia a reliable source for medical advice? The Guardian (London) 1 June 2014.

  • Sepkowitz K A. Looking for the final word on treatment. The New York Times (New York) 14 May 2014.

  • Ginsburg S, Gingerich A, Kogan J R, Watling C J, Eva K W. Idiosyncrasy in assessment comments: do faculty have distinct writing styles when completing in-training evaluation reports? Acad Med 2020; DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003643.

  • Shoemaker S J, Wolf M S, Brach C. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) and User’s Guide. 2014. Available at (accessed 16 December 2024).

  • McLaughlin G H. SMOG grading – a new readability formula. J Read 1969; 12: 639–646.

  • Meade M J, Dreyer C W. Web-based information on orthodontic clear aligners: a qualitative and readability assessment. Aust Dent J 2020; 65: 225–232.

  • Meade M J, Dreyer C W. Orthodontic treatment consent forms: a readability analysis. J Orthod 2022; 49: 32–38.

  • Pitcher N, Mitchell D, Hughes C. Template and guidance for writing a Cochrane plain language summary. 2022. Available at (accessed 16 December 2024).

  • Šuto J, Marušić A, Buljan I. Linguistic analysis of plain language summaries and corresponding scientific summaries of Cochrane systematic reviews about oncology interventions. Cancer Med 2023; 12: 10950–10960.

  • Seehra J, Bertl K, Faggion C M Jr, Pandis N. The certainty of the evidence in oral health has not improved according to GRADE. a meta-epidemiological study. J Clin Epidemiol 2022; 142: 29–37.

  • Braithwaite R S. A piece of my mind. EBM’s six dangerous words. JAMA 2013; 310: 2149–2150.

  • Garcia-Retamero R, Cokely E T. Designing visual aids that promote risk literacy: a systematic review of health research and evidence-based design heuristics. Human Factors 2017; 59: 582–627.

  • Seehra J, Cockerham L, Pandis N. A quality assessment of orthodontic patient information leaflets. Prog Orthod 2016; 17: 15.

  • Karačić J, Dondio P, Buljan I, Hren D, Marušić A. Languages for different health information readers: multitrait-multimethod content analysis of Cochrane systematic reviews textual summary formats. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019; 19: 75.

  • Kirchner G J, Kim R Y, Weddle J B, Bible J E. Can artificial intelligence improve the readability of patient education materials? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2023; 481: 2260–2267.

  • Will J, Gupta M, Zaretsky J, Dowlath A, Testa P, Feldman J. Enhancing the readability of online patient education materials using large language models: cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res 2025; DOI: 10.2196/69955.

  • Nasra M, Jaffri R, Pavlin-Premri D et al. Can artificial intelligence improve patient educational material readability? A systematic review and narrative synthesis. Intern Med J 2025; 55: 20–34.

  • Torres R B, Restrepo M, Stern B Z et al. Artificial intelligence shows limited success in improving readability of levels of Spanish-language orthopaedic patient education materials. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2025; 483: 1185–1192.

  • link

    Exit mobile version