Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 The ratings of individual DISCERN items (N = 36)

From: A quality assessment of orthodontic patient information leaflets

  Rating of 1 and 2 (low quality) N (%) Rating of 3 (moderate quality) N (%) Rating of 4 and 5 (high quality) N (%)
DISCERN item
1) Are the aims clear? 17 (47.2 %) 14 (38.9 %) 5 (13.9 %)
2) Does the leaflet achieve its aims?a 0 (0.0 %) 0 (0.0 %) 33 (91.2 %)
3) Is it relevant? 0 (0.0 %) 2 (5.6 %) 34 (94.4 %)
4) Is it clear what sources of information were used to compile the publication (other than the author or producer)? 36 (100 %) 0 (0.0 %) 0 (0.0 %)
5) Is it clear when the information used or reported in the publication was produced? 6 (16.7 %) 30 (83.3 %) 0 (0.0%)
6) Is it balanced and unbiased? 1 (2.8 %) 15 (41.7 %) 20 (55.5 %)
7) Does it provide details of additional sources of support and information? 25 (69.4 %) 6 (16.7 %) 5 (13.9 %)
8) Does it refer to areas of uncertainty? 2 (5.5 %) 5 (13.9 %) 29 (80.6 %)
9) Does it describe how each treatment works? 5 (13.9 %) 9 (25.0 %) 22 (61.1 %)
10) Does it describe the benefits of each treatment? 2 (5.6 %) 16 (44.4 %) 18 (50.0 %)
11) Does it describe the risks of each treatment? 12 (33.3 %) 8 (22.2 %) 16 (44.5 %)
12) Does it describe what would happen if no treatment is used? 18 (50.0 %) 10 (27.8 %) 8 (22.2 %)
13) Does it describe how the treatment choices would affect overall quality of life? 7 (19.4 %) 16 (44.4 %) 13 (36.1 %)
14) Is it clear that there may be more than one possible treatment choice? 14 (38.8 %) 11 (30.6 %) 11 (30.6 %)
15) Does it provide support for shared decision-making? 22 (61.1 %) 10 (27.8 %) 4 (11.1 %)
  1. aNot applicable for three leaflets