Readability of Dysphagia-Related Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: An Update

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the readability of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) related to dysphagia. Method: This descriptive cross-sectional analysis involved a systematic search to identify dysphagia-related PROMs. Readability was assessed using the Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), FORCAST, Gunning Fog Index (FOG), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas. Results: All five PROMs exceeded the recommended fifth- to sixth-grade reading level across four of the five formulas. CLI scores ranged from 5.5 to 7.7, FORCAST from 9.6 to 10.8, FOG from 7.0 to 9.3, SMOG from 8.1 to 9.9, and FRE from 65 to 79. The average readability grade level ranged from 7.6 to 9.6. Quantitative features such as sentence length, syllable count, and multisyllabic word use further confirmed elevated reading complexity. Conclusions: Dysphagia-related PROMs are written at reading levels that may exceed the comprehension skills of many patients. Developers should incorporate readability assessments during instrument design and validation to enhance accessibility and ensure accurate, representative responses. Poor readability threatens the validity, reliability, and clinical applicability of PROMs, with potential implications for treatment planning and health outcomes. Clinicians must critically evaluate the reading demands of PROMs prior to administration.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups
Published
2026-04-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_persp-25-00145
Primary Topic
Dysphagia Assessment and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Readability of Dysphagia-Related Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: An Update

Richard I. Zraick, Bonnie K. Slavych, Talia Tumminello
Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups
Dysphagia Assessment and Management
article

Readability of Dysphagia-Related Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: An Update

Richard I. Zraick, Bonnie K. Slavych, Talia Tumminello
article en

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the readability of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) related to dysphagia. Method: This descriptive cross-sectional analysis involved a systematic search to identify dysphagia-related PROMs. Readability was assessed using the Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), FORCAST, Gunning Fog Index (FOG), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas. Results: All five PROMs exceeded the recommended fifth- to sixth-grade reading level across four of the five formulas. CLI scores ranged from 5.5 to 7.7, FORCAST from 9.6 to 10.8, FOG from 7.0 to 9.3, SMOG from 8.1 to 9.9, and FRE from 65 to 79. The average readability grade level ranged from 7.6 to 9.6. Quantitative features such as sentence length, syllable count, and multisyllabic word use further confirmed elevated reading complexity. Conclusions: Dysphagia-related PROMs are written at reading levels that may exceed the comprehension skills of many patients. Developers should incorporate readability assessments during instrument design and validation to enhance accessibility and ensure accurate, representative responses. Poor readability threatens the validity, reliability, and clinical applicability of PROMs, with potential implications for treatment planning and health outcomes. Clinicians must critically evaluate the reading demands of PROMs prior to administration.

Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups
University of Central Florida (US), Missouri State University (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Dysphagia Assessment and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.