Assessing the suitability of written stroke materials: an evaluation of the interrater reliability of the suitability assessment of materials (SAM) checklist

Hoffmann, Tammy and Ladner, Yvette (2012) Assessing the suitability of written stroke materials: an evaluation of the interrater reliability of the suitability assessment of materials (SAM) checklist. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 19 5: 417-422.

Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your UQ eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Author Hoffmann, Tammy
Ladner, Yvette
Title Assessing the suitability of written stroke materials: an evaluation of the interrater reliability of the suitability assessment of materials (SAM) checklist
Journal name Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1074-9357
1945-5119
Publication date 2012-09
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1310/tsr1905-417
Volume 19
Issue 5
Start page 417
End page 422
Total pages 6
Place of publication St Louis, MO, United States
Publisher Thomas Land Publishers
Collection year 2013
Language eng
Formatted abstract Purpose: Written materials are frequently used to provide education to stroke patients and their carers. However, poor quality materials are a barrier to effective information provision. A quick and reliable method of evaluating material quality is needed. This study evaluated the interrater reliability of the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) checklist in a sample of written stroke education materials.

Methods: Two independent raters evaluated the materials (n = 25) using the SAM, and ratings were analyzed to reveal total percentage agreements and weighted kappa values for individual items and overall SAM rating.

Results: The majority of the individual SAM items had high interrater reliability, with 17 of the 22 items achieving substantial, almost perfect, or perfect weighted kappa value scores. The overall SAM rating achieved a weighted kappa value of 0.60, with a percentage total agreement of 96%.

Conclusion: Health care professionals should evaluate the content and design characteristics of written education materials before using them with patients. A tool such as the SAM checklist can be used; however, raters should exercise caution when interpreting results from items with more subjective scoring criteria. Refinements to the scoring criteria for these items are recommended. The value of the SAM is that it can be used to identify specific elements that should be modified before education materials are provided to patients.
Keyword Health education
Interrater reliability
Patient education
SAM
Stroke
Written education materials
Written information
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: Official 2013 Collection
School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 3 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 4 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 49 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Sun, 21 Oct 2012, 00:04:58 EST by System User on behalf of School of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences