References
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare benefits [Internet]. Baltimore: US Dept of Health and Human Services; 2011 [cited 2011 Jun 28]. Available from: http://www.medicare.gov/navigation/medicare-basics/.
- Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, Paulsen C. The health literacy of America's adults: results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy [Internet]. Washington: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Dept of Education; 2006 Sep [cited 2011 Aug 18]. Report No.: NCES 2006-483. p. 12–8. Available from: http://0-web.ebscohost.com.libcat.widener.edu/.
- Kirsch IS, Jungeblut A, Jenkins L, Kolstad A. Adult literacy in America: a first look at the findings of the National Adult Literacy Survey. 3rd ed. [Internet]. National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, US Dept of Education; Washington, DC 2002 Apr [cited 2011 Aug 18]. Report No.: NCES 1993-275. p. 30–2. Available from: http://0-web.ebscohost.com.libcat.widener.edu/.
- Nebling T, Jochem M. Equipping and empowering patients: an examination of project work in critical health literacy. J Commun Healthcare 2010;3(1):37–47.
- Sullivan T. Health care reform law: what it means for medical communicators. AMWA J [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2011 Jan 10];25(4):162–4.
- Giles TD, Still B. A syntactic approach to readability. J Tech Writing Commun [Internet]. 2005 [cited 2011 Aug 18];35:47–70. Available from: http://0-web.ebscohost.com.libcat.widener.edu/.
- Bonk RJ. Complexity vs. comprehension: a content analysis of the US Medicare prescription drug plan. J Commun Healthcare 2009;2(2):119–30.
- Krippendorff J. Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2004. Chapter 2, Conceptual foundation, p. 18–25.
- Krippendorff J. Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2004. Chapter 3, Conceptualizing content analysis, p. 58–62.
- Krippendorff K. Section 6.2, Testing the reliability of content analysis data: what is involved and why. In: , Krippendorff K, Bock MA (eds.) The content analysis reader. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2009. p. 350–7.
- Janis I. Section 3, The problem of validating content analysis. In: , Krippendorff K, Bock MA (eds.) The content analysis reader. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2009. p. 358–66.
- Manganello J, Blake N. A study of quantitative content analysis of health messages in U.S. media from 1985 to 2005. Health Commun. 2010;25:387–96.
- Doak LG, Doak CC. Writing for readers with a wide range of reading skills. AMWA J [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2011 Jan 10];25(4):149–54.
- Doak CC, Doak LG, Root JH. Teaching patients with low literacy skills. 2nd ed. [Internet]. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company; 1996. Chapter 4, Assessing suitability of materials, p. 41–60. [cited 2011 Apr 6]. Available from: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/healthliteracy/resources/doak-book/.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare & you 2011. [Internet]. Baltimore: US Dept of Health and Human Services; 2011 [cited 2011 May 18]. Available from: http://www.medicare.gov/Library/.
- Lanning BA, Doyle EI. Health literacy: developing a practical framework for effective health communication. AMWA J [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2011 Jan 10];25(4):155–61.
- Miller C. The SPLASH scoring system to assess the quality of written patient information in Irish radiation therapy departments. J Commun Healthcare 2010;3(3–4):214–27.
- Nancekevill S. Meeting the challenges of health literacy: the medical communicator's role. AMWA J [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2011 Jan 10];25(4):146–8.