Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Bethany Anderson x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Stephen A. Rosenberg, David Francis, Craig R. Hullett, Zachary S. Morris, Michael M. Fisher, Jeffrey V. Brower, Kristin A. Bradley, Bethany M. Anderson, Michael F. Bassetti, and Randall J. Kimple

Background: The NIH and Department of Health & Human Services recommend online patient information (OPI) be written at a sixth grade level. We used a panel of readability analyses to assess OPI from NCI-Designated Cancer Center (NCIDCC) Web sites. Methods: Cancer.gov was used to identify 68 NCIDCC Web sites from which we collected both general OPI and OPI specific to breast, prostate, lung, and colon cancers. This text was analyzed by 10 commonly used readability tests: the New Dale-Chall Readability Formula, Flesch Reading Ease scale, Flesch-Kinaid Grade Level, FORCAST scale, Fry Readability Graph, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook test, Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook index, New Fog Count, Raygor Readability Estimate Graph, and Coleman-Liau Index. We tested the hypothesis that the readability of NCIDCC OPI was written at the sixth grade level. Secondary analyses were performed to compare readability of OPI between comprehensive and noncomprehensive centers, by region, and to OPI produced by the American Cancer Society (ACS). Results: A mean of 30,507 words from 40 comprehensive and 18 noncomprehensive NCIDCCs was analyzed (7 nonclinical and 3 without appropriate OPI were excluded). Using a composite grade level score, the mean readability score of 12.46 (ie, college level: 95% CI, 12.13–12.79) was significantly greater than the target grade level of 6 (middle-school: P<.001). No difference between comprehensive and noncomprehensive centers was identified. Regional differences were identified in 4 of the 10 readability metrics (P<.05). ACS OPI provides easier language, at the seventh to ninth grade level, across all tests (P<.01). Conclusions: OPI from NCIDCC Web sites is more complex than recommended for the average patient.

Full access

William J. Gradishar, Meena S. Moran, Jame Abraham, Rebecca Aft, Doreen Agnese, Kimberly H. Allison, Bethany Anderson, Harold J. Burstein, Helen Chew, Chau Dang, Anthony D. Elias, Sharon H. Giordano, Matthew P. Goetz, Lori J. Goldstein, Sara A. Hurvitz, Steven J. Isakoff, Rachel C. Jankowitz, Sara H. Javid, Jairam Krishnamurthy, Marilyn Leitch, Janice Lyons, Joanne Mortimer, Sameer A. Patel, Lori J. Pierce, Laura H. Rosenberger, Hope S. Rugo, Amy Sitapati, Karen Lisa Smith, Mary Lou Smith, Hatem Soliman, Erica M. Stringer-Reasor, Melinda L. Telli, John H. Ward, Kari B. Wisinski, Jessica S. Young, Jennifer Burns, and Rashmi Kumar

The therapeutic options for patients with noninvasive or invasive breast cancer are complex and varied. These NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer include recommendations for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget disease, phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, and management of breast cancer during pregnancy. The content featured in this issue focuses on the recommendations for overall management of ductal carcinoma in situ and the workup and locoregional management of early stage invasive breast cancer. For the full version of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer, visit NCCN.org.