• 1
    National Cancer Institute. Cancer Risk Communication: What We Know and What We Need to Learn. December 10–11, 1998. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1999;( 25): 1185.
  • 2
    US Department of Health and Human Services. Health Communication. In: Healthy People 2010: Understanding and Improving Health. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, November 2000.
  • 3
    National Cancer Institute, Cancer Control and Population Sciences, Basic Biobehavioral Research Branch. A New Agenda for Cancer Control Research: Report of the Cancer Control Review Group. August 7, 1997.
  • 4
    National Cancer Institute. Reducing Health Disparities in High Cervical Cancer Mortality Regions. Corpus Christi, TX, November 28–30, 2001.
  • 5
    National Cancer Institute, Office of Cancer Communication. How the Public Perceives, Processes, and Interprets Risk information: Findings From Focus Group Research With the General Public. 1998.
  • 6
    Doak C, Doak L, Friedell B, et al. Improving comprehension for cancer patients with low literacy skills: Strategies for clinicians. CA Cancer J Clin 1998; 48: 151162.
  • 7
    Ad Hoc Committee on Health Literacy for the Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association. Health literacy: Report of the Council on Scientific Affairs. JAMA 1999; 281: 552557.
  • 8
    Davis TC, Dolan N, Ferreira MR, et al. The role of inadequate health literacy skills in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Invest 2001: 19: 193200.
  • 9
    Kirsch I, Jungeblut A, Jenkins L, et al. Adult literacy in America: A first look at the results of the National Adult Literacy Survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Dept of Education; 1993.
  • 10
    Williams MV, Parker RM, Baker DW, et al. Inadequate functional health literacy among patients at two public hospitals. JAMA 1995; 274: 16771682.
  • 11
    Gazmararian JA, Baker DW, Williams MV, et al. Health literacy among Medicare enrollees in a managed care organization. JAMA 1999; 281: 545551.
  • 12
    US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Library of Medicine (NLM). In: Seiden CR, Zorn M, Ratzan S, et al; eds. Health Literacy, January 1990 through 1999. Bethesda, MD: NLM. February 2000; NLM Pub. No. CBM 2000–1.
  • 13
    National Work Group on Literacy and Health. Communicating with patients who have limited literacy skills. J Fam Pract 1998; 46: 168176.
  • 14
    Davis TC, Michielutte R, Askov EN, et al. Practical assessment of adult literacy in health care. Health Education and Behavior 1998; 25: 613624.
  • 15
    Davis TC, Crouch M, Wills G, et al. The gap between patient reading comprehension and the readability of patient education materials. J Fam Pract 1990; 31: 533538.
  • 16
    Parikh NS, Parker RM, Nurss JR, et al. Shame and health literacy: The unspoken connection. Patent Educ Counsel 1996; 27: 3339.
  • 17
    Davis TC, Long S, Jackson R, et al. Rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine: A shortened screening instrument. Fam Med 1993; 25: 391395.
  • 18
    Parker RM, Baker D, Williams MV, et al. The test of functional health literacy in adults (TOFHLA): A new instrument for measuring patients' literacy skills. J Gen Intern Med 1995; 10: 537545.
  • 19
    Williams MV, Davis TC, Parker RM, et al. The role of health literacy in patient-physician communication. Fam Med; In press.
  • 20
    Michielutte R, Alciati MH, el-Arculli R. Cancer control research and literacy. J Health Care Poor Underserved 1999; 10: 281297.
  • 21
    A summary of the American Cancer Society Report to the Nation. Cancer in the poor. CA Cancer J Clin 1989; 39: 263295.
  • 22
    Cella DF, Orav EJ, Kornblith AB, et al. Socioeconomic status and cancer survival. J Clin Oncol 1991; 9: 15001509.
  • 23
    Baquet CR, Horm JW, Gibbs T, et al. Socioeconomic factors and cancer incidence among blacks and whites. J Natl Cancer Inst 1991; 83: 551557.
  • 24
    National Institutes of Health. Cancer Statistics Review: 1973–1988. Bethesda, MD: NCI, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control. NIH Publ No. 91–2789, 1991.
  • 25
    Freeman H. Race, poverty and cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1991; 83: 526527.
  • 26
    Li A, Burton G, Glass J. Breast cancer socioeconomic and racial comparison between hospital populations [abstract]. Clin Cancer Res 1993; 41: 235.
  • 27
    Bennett CL, Ferreira MR, Davis TC, et al. Relation between literacy, race, and stage of presentation among low-income patients with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 31013104.
  • 28
    Zapka JG, Stoddard AM, Costanza ME, et al. Breast cancer screening by mammography: Utilization and associated factors. Am J Public Health 1989; 79: 14991502.
  • 29
    Weiss BD, Blanchard JS, McGee DL, et al. Illiteracy among Medicaid recipients and its relationship to health care costs. J Health Care Poor Underserved 1994; 5: 99111.
  • 30
    Weiss BD, Hart G, McGee DL, et al. Health status of illiterate adults: Relation between literacy and health status among persons with low literacy skills. J Am Board Fam Pract 1992; 5: 257264.
  • 31
    Kim SP, Knight SJ, Tomori C, et al. Health literacy and shared decision making for prostate cancer patients with low socioeconomic status. Cancer Invest 2001; 19: 684691.
  • 32
    Doak LG, Doak CC, Meade CD. Strategies to improve cancer education materials. Oncol Nurs Forum 1996; 23: 13051312.
  • 33
    Davis TC, Arnold C, Berkel H, et al. Knowledge and attitude on screening mammography among low-literate, low-income women. Cancer 1996; 78: 19121920.
  • 34
    Davis TC, Holcombe RF, Berkel HJ, et al. Informed consent for clinical trials: A comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 93: 668674.
  • 35
    Davis TC, Williams MV, Branch WT, et al. Explaining illness to patients with limited literacy. In: Whaley BB (ed) et al. Explaining illness: Research, theory, and strategies. LEA's Com-munication Series. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. 1999; 171194.
  • 36
    Dale W, Sartor O, Davis TC, et al. Understanding barriers to the early detection of prostate cancer among lower socioeconomic men. Prostate J 1999; 1: 179184.
  • 37
    List MA, Lacey L, Hopkins E, et al. The involvement of low literate elderly women in the development and distribution of cancer screening mat-erials. Fam Community Health 1994; 17: 4255.
  • 38
    Lannin DR, Mathews HF, Mitchell J, et al. Influence of socioeconomic and cultural factors on racial differences in late-stage presentation of breast cancer. JAMA 1998; 279: 18011807.
  • 39
    Dale W. Evaluating focus group data: Barriers to screening for prostate cancer patients. Cancer Treat Res 1998; 97: 115128.
  • 40
    Friedell GH, Linville LH, Rubio A, et al. What providers should know about community cancer control. Cancer Pract 1997; 5: 367374.
  • 41
    Macario E, Emmons KM, Sorensen G, et al. Factors influencing nutrition education for patients with low literacy skills. J Am Diet Assoc 1998; 98: 559564.
  • 42
    Lindau ST, Tomori C, McCarville MA, et al. Improving rates of cervical cancer screening and Pap smear follow-up for low-income women with limited health literacy. Cancer Invest 2001; 19: 316323.
  • 43
    Siminoff LA, Fetting JH, Abeloff MD. Doctor-patient communication about breast cancer adjuvant therapy. J Clin Oncol 1989; 7: 11921200.
  • 44
    Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Black WC, et al. The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127: 966972.
  • 45
    Anscher MS, Gold DT. Literacy and laryngectomy: How should one treat head and neck cancer in patients who cannot read or write? South Med J 1991; 84: 209213.
  • 46
    Cohen-Cole SA. Why “three” functions? In: Cohen-Cole, SA The medical interview: The three-function approach. St. Louis, MO: Mosby Year Book; 1991.
  • 47
    Tabak N. Decision making in consenting to experimental cancer therapy. Cancer Nurs 1995; 18: 8996.
  • 48
    Mayeaux EJ, Murphy PW, Arnold CL, et al. Improving patient education for patients with low literacy. Am Fam Physician 1996; 53: 205211.
  • 49
    Doak CC, Doak LG, Root JH. Teaching patients with low-literacy skills. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: JB Lippincott Co; 1996.
  • 50
    Samora J, Saunders L, Larson R. Medical vocabulary knowledge among hospital patients. Journal Health Hum Behav 1961: 8392.
  • 51
    Centers for Disease Control. Health beliefs, compliance—hypertension. MMWR 1990; 39: 701704.
  • 52
    Gibbs RD, Gibbs PH, Henrich J. Patient understanding of commonly used medical vocabulary. J Fam Prac 1987; 25: 176178.
  • 53
    Davis TC, Fredrickson DD, Arnold CL. Childhood vaccine risk/benefit communication in private practice office settings: A national survey. Pediatrics [online] February 2001;107(2):e17. Accessed February, 2001.
  • 54
    Ong LM, de Haes JC, Hoos AM, et al. Doctor-patient communication: A review of the literature. Soc Sci Med 1995; 40: 903918.
  • 55
    Hadlow J, Pitts M. The understanding of common health terms by doctors, nurses and patients. Soc Sci Med 1991; 32: 193196.
  • 56
    Waitzkins H. Information giving in medical care. J Health Soc Behav 1985; 26: 81101.
  • 57
    Bourhis RY, Roth S, MacQueen G. Communication in the hospital setting: A survey of medical and everyday language use amongst patients, nurses and doctors. Soc Sci Med 1989; 28: 339346.
  • 58
    Raich PC, Plomer KD, Coyne CA. Literacy, comprehension, and informed consent in clinical research. Cancer Invest 2001; 19: 437445.
  • 59
    Cassileth BR, Zupkis RV, Sutton-Smith K, et al. Informed consent—why are its goals imperfectly realized? N Eng J Med 1980; 302: 896900.
  • 60
    Taub HA, Baker MT, Sturr JF. Informed consent for research: Effects of readability, participant age, and education. J Am Geriatr Soc 1986; 34: 601606.
  • 61
    Morrow GR. How readable are subject consent forms? JAMA 1980; 244: 5658.
  • 62
    Grundner TM. On the readability of surgical consent forms. N Engl J Med 1980; 302: 900902.
  • 63
    Jubelirer SJ. Level of reading difficulty in educational pamphlets and informed consent documents for cancer patients. WV Med J 1991; 87: 554557.
  • 64
    LoVerde ME, Prochazka AV, Byyny RL. Research consent forms: Continued unreadability and increasing length. J Gen Intern Med 1989; 4: 410412.
  • 65
    Rivera R, Reed JS, Menius D. Evaluating the readability of informed consent forms used in contraceptive clinical trials. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1992; 38: 227230.
  • 66
    Tarnowski KJ, Allen DM, Mayhall C, et al. Readability of pediatric biomedical research informed consent forms. Pediatrics 1990; 85: 5862.
  • 67
    Grossman SA, Piantadosi S, Covahey C. Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families? J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 22112215.
  • 68
    Doak L, Doak C. Patient comprehension profiles: Recent findings and strategies. Patient Couns Health Educ 1980; 2: 101106.
  • 69
    Powers RD. Emergency department patient literacy and the readability of patient-directed materials. Ann Emerg Med 1988; 17: 124126.
  • 70
    Jolly BT, Scott J, Feied C, et al. Functional illiteracy among emergency department patients: A preliminary study. Ann Emerg Med, 1993; 22: 573578.
  • 71
    Davis TC, Mayeaux E, Fredrickson S, et al. Reading ability of parents compared with reading level of pediatric patient education materials. Pediatrics 1994; 93: 460468.
  • 72
    Davis TC, Berkel HJ, Arnold CL, et al. Results of educational intervention to increase mammography utilization in a public hospital. J Gen Intern Med 1998; 13: 230233.
  • 73
    Davis TC, Bocchini JA Jr, Fredrickson D, et al. Parent comprehension of polio vaccine information pamphlets. Pediatrics 1996: 97: 804810.
  • 74
    Glazer HR, Kirk LM, Bosler FE. Patient education pamphlets about prevention, detection, and treatment of breast cancer for low literacy women. Patient Educ Couns 1996; 27: 185189.
  • 75
    Meade CD, Diekmann J, Thornhill DG. Readability of American Cancer Society patient education literature. Oncol Nurs Forum 1992; 19: 5155.
  • 76
    Meade CD, Byrd JC. Patient literacy and the readability of smoking education literature. Am J Public Health 1989; 79: 204206.
  • 77
    Michielutte R, Bahnson J, Beal P. Readability of the public education literature on cancer prevention and detection. J Cancer Educ 1990; 5: 5561.
  • 78
    Wilson FL. Measuring patients' ability to read and comprehend: A first step in patient education. Nursing connections 1995; 8: 1725.
  • 79
    Guidry JJ, Fagan P, Walker V. Cultural sensitivity and readability of breast and prostate printed cancer education materials targeting African Americans. J Natl Med Assoc 1998; 90: 165169.
  • 80
    Foltz AT, Sullivan JM. Limited literacy revisited implications for patient education. Cancer Pract 1999; 7: 145150.
  • 81
    Cooley ME, Moriarty H, Berger MS, et al. Patient literacy and the readability of written cancer education materials. Oncol Nurs Forum 1995; 22: 13451351.
  • 82
    Freimuth VS, Mettger W. Is there a hard-to-reach audience? Public Health Rep 1990; 105: 232238.
  • 83
    Anderson R, Hiebert E, Scott J, et al. Becoming a Nation of Readers: The Report of the Commission on Reading. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading; Washington, DC: National Institute of Education, 1985; 721.
  • 84
    AMC Cancer Research Center. Beyond the brochure: Alternative approaches to effective health communication. Denver: AMC Cancer Research Center, 1994. Pub. # 994589.
  • 85
    Michielutte R, Bahnson J, Dignan MB, et al. The use of illustrations and narrative text style to improve readability of a health education brochure. J Cancer Educ 1992; 7: 251260.
  • 86
    Rudd RE, Comings JP. Learner developed materials: An empowering product. Health Ed Q 1994; 313327.
  • 87
    Meade CD, McKinney WP, Barnas GP. Educating patients with limited literacy skills: The effectiveness of printed and videotaped materials about colon cancer. Am J Public Health 1994; 84: 119121.
  • 88
    Biermann JS, Golladay GJ, Greenfield ML, et al. Evaluation of cancer information on the Internet. Cancer 1999; 86: 381390.
  • 89
    Davis TC, Fredrickson DD, Arnold C, et al. A polio immunization pamphlet with increased appeal and simplified language does not improve comprehension to an acceptable level. Patient Educ Couns 1998; 33: 2537.
  • 90
    Quade G, Zenker S, Burde B, et al. Differences in demographic data regarding physicians and patients in the US or abroad using a medically oriented Internet information service. Stud Health Technol Inform 2000; 77: 668672.
  • 91
    Berland GK, Elliot MN, Morales LS. Health information on the Internet: Accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA 2001; 285: 26122621.
  • 92
    Murphy PW, Chesson AL, Walker L, et al. Comparing the effectiveness of video and written material for improving knowledge among sleep disorders clinic patients with limited literacy skills. South Med J 2000; 93: 297304.
  • 93
    Eng E. The Save Our Sisters Project: A social network for reaching rural black women. Cancer 1993; 72: 10711077.
  • 94
    Yancey AK, Tanjasiri SP, Klein M, et al. Increased cancer screening behavior in women of color by culturally sensitive video exposure. Prev Med 1995; 24: 142148.
  • 95
    Pignone M, Harris R, Kinsinger L. Videotape-based decision aid for colon cancer screening. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 2000; 133: 761769.
  • 96
    Miles S, Davis TC. Patients who can't read. Implications for the health care system. JAMA 1995; 274: 17191720.