This study evaluated how well people can use the SHeLL Health Literacy Editor to make health information easy to understand.

What did we do?

• We recruited 211 people who develop health information as part of their role, with 181 people in the final analysis.  

• People were asked to revise 3 short pieces of health information, on the topics of sciatica, dementia and cancer. The average grade reading score was 14. People were randomly asked to use the SHeLL Health Literacy Editor to help them do this, or to revise the texts the way they normally would.

• We looked at how well the revised texts scored for Grade reading score, Complex Language, and Passive Voice (read more about there here + link to tips and technical notes page). We also asked two health literacy experts to rate whether each text used plain language and had kept the original key messages.

What did we find?

• People who were asked to use the SHeLL Health Literacy Editor created texts with a lower Grade reading score, less complex language and fewer passive voice, compare to people who revised the texts the way they normally would. Experts rated SHeLL-Editor-revised texts more highly, and reported that they had the same key messages as the original texts.

• Not everyone submitted a revised text to the study team. When we just look at people who completed the task, the effects were even larger. On average, people who used the SHeLL Editor created texts with a grade reading score of 8.5, and they removed more than half of the complex language and passive voice. These scores were significantly higher than those for people who revised the texts the way they normally would (grade reading score 12.3, complex language -16%, passive voice -24%).

• Overall this shows that people using the Editor are able to use its feedback to create health information that better aligns with health literacy principles.

Related Publications