English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The quality of patient education materials is an important issue for health educators, clinicians, and community health workers. We describe a challenge achieving reliable scores between coders when using the Patient Educational Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) to evaluate farmworker health materials in spring 2020. Four coders were unable to achieve reliability after three attempts at coding calibration. Further investigation identified improvements to the PEMAT codebook and evidence of the difficulty of achieving traditional interrater reliability in the form of Krippendorff’s alpha. Our solution was to use multiple raters and average ratings to achieve an acceptable score with an intraclass correlation coefficient. Practitioners using the PEMAT to evaluate materials should consider averaging the scores of multiple raters as PEMAT results otherwise may be highly sensitive to who is doing the rating. Not doing so may inadvertently result in the use of suboptimal patient education materials.

Practical Advice Regarding the Reliability of the Patient Educational Materials Assessment Tool for Health Educators