Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic review
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10451/25562 |
Resumo: | OBJECTIVE: To review studies on the readability of package leaflets of medicinal products for human use. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review between 2008 and 2013 using the keywords “Readability and Package Leaflet” and “Readability and Package Insert” in the academic search engine Biblioteca do Conhecimento Online, comprising different bibliographic resources/databases. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses criteria were applied to prepare the draft of the report. Quantitative and qualitative original studies were included. Opinion or review studies not written in English, Portuguese, Italian, French, or Spanish were excluded. RESULTS: We identified 202 studies, of which 180 were excluded and 22 were enrolled [two enrolling healthcare professionals, 10 enrolling other type of participants (including patients), three focused on adverse reactions, and 7 descriptive studies]. The package leaflets presented various readability problems, such as complex and difficult to understand texts, small font size, or few illustrations. The main methods to assess the readability of the package leaflet were usability tests or legibility formulae. Limitations with these methods included reduced number of participants; lack of readability formulas specifically validated for specific languages (e.g., Portuguese); and absence of an assessment on patients literacy, health knowledge, cognitive skills, levels of satisfaction, and opinions. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the package leaflets presented various readability problems. In this review, some methodological limitations were identified, including the participation of a limited number of patients and healthcare professionals, the absence of prior assessments of participant literacy, humor or sense of satisfaction, or the predominance of studies not based on roleplays about the use of medicines. These limitations should be avoided in future studies and be considered when interpreting the results. |
id |
RCAP_bba8c9f110dc129d86023d4281075584 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.ul.pt:10451/25562 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic reviewLegibilidade das bulas dos medicamentos: revisão sistemáticaMedicine package insertsComprehensionConsumer health informationReviewOBJECTIVE: To review studies on the readability of package leaflets of medicinal products for human use. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review between 2008 and 2013 using the keywords “Readability and Package Leaflet” and “Readability and Package Insert” in the academic search engine Biblioteca do Conhecimento Online, comprising different bibliographic resources/databases. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses criteria were applied to prepare the draft of the report. Quantitative and qualitative original studies were included. Opinion or review studies not written in English, Portuguese, Italian, French, or Spanish were excluded. RESULTS: We identified 202 studies, of which 180 were excluded and 22 were enrolled [two enrolling healthcare professionals, 10 enrolling other type of participants (including patients), three focused on adverse reactions, and 7 descriptive studies]. The package leaflets presented various readability problems, such as complex and difficult to understand texts, small font size, or few illustrations. The main methods to assess the readability of the package leaflet were usability tests or legibility formulae. Limitations with these methods included reduced number of participants; lack of readability formulas specifically validated for specific languages (e.g., Portuguese); and absence of an assessment on patients literacy, health knowledge, cognitive skills, levels of satisfaction, and opinions. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the package leaflets presented various readability problems. In this review, some methodological limitations were identified, including the participation of a limited number of patients and healthcare professionals, the absence of prior assessments of participant literacy, humor or sense of satisfaction, or the predominance of studies not based on roleplays about the use of medicines. These limitations should be avoided in future studies and be considered when interpreting the results.Faculdade de Saúde Pública da Universidade de São PauloRepositório da Universidade de LisboaPires, CarlaVigário, MarinaCavaco, Afonso2016-12-29T14:43:28Z20152015-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10451/25562engPires, C., Vigário, M., & Cavaco, A. (2015). Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic review. Revista de Saúde Pública, 49, 4. http://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-8910.201504900555910.1590/S0034-8910.2015049005559info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-11-08T16:14:58Zoai:repositorio.ul.pt:10451/25562Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T21:42:22.006652Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic review Legibilidade das bulas dos medicamentos: revisão sistemática |
title |
Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic review |
spellingShingle |
Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic review Pires, Carla Medicine package inserts Comprehension Consumer health information Review |
title_short |
Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic review |
title_full |
Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic review |
title_fullStr |
Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed |
Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic review |
title_sort |
Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic review |
author |
Pires, Carla |
author_facet |
Pires, Carla Vigário, Marina Cavaco, Afonso |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Vigário, Marina Cavaco, Afonso |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Repositório da Universidade de Lisboa |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Pires, Carla Vigário, Marina Cavaco, Afonso |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Medicine package inserts Comprehension Consumer health information Review |
topic |
Medicine package inserts Comprehension Consumer health information Review |
description |
OBJECTIVE: To review studies on the readability of package leaflets of medicinal products for human use. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review between 2008 and 2013 using the keywords “Readability and Package Leaflet” and “Readability and Package Insert” in the academic search engine Biblioteca do Conhecimento Online, comprising different bibliographic resources/databases. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses criteria were applied to prepare the draft of the report. Quantitative and qualitative original studies were included. Opinion or review studies not written in English, Portuguese, Italian, French, or Spanish were excluded. RESULTS: We identified 202 studies, of which 180 were excluded and 22 were enrolled [two enrolling healthcare professionals, 10 enrolling other type of participants (including patients), three focused on adverse reactions, and 7 descriptive studies]. The package leaflets presented various readability problems, such as complex and difficult to understand texts, small font size, or few illustrations. The main methods to assess the readability of the package leaflet were usability tests or legibility formulae. Limitations with these methods included reduced number of participants; lack of readability formulas specifically validated for specific languages (e.g., Portuguese); and absence of an assessment on patients literacy, health knowledge, cognitive skills, levels of satisfaction, and opinions. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the package leaflets presented various readability problems. In this review, some methodological limitations were identified, including the participation of a limited number of patients and healthcare professionals, the absence of prior assessments of participant literacy, humor or sense of satisfaction, or the predominance of studies not based on roleplays about the use of medicines. These limitations should be avoided in future studies and be considered when interpreting the results. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015 2015-01-01T00:00:00Z 2016-12-29T14:43:28Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10451/25562 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10451/25562 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Pires, C., Vigário, M., & Cavaco, A. (2015). Readability of medicinal package leaflets: a systematic review. Revista de Saúde Pública, 49, 4. http://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-8910.2015049005559 10.1590/S0034-8910.2015049005559 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Faculdade de Saúde Pública da Universidade de São Paulo |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Faculdade de Saúde Pública da Universidade de São Paulo |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799134338851274752 |