OBJECTIVE: Analyse the linguistic and numerical complexity of COVID-19-related health information communicated from Australian national and state governments and health agencies to national and local early childhood education (ECE) settings. METHODS: Publicly available health information (n = 630) was collected from Australian national and state governments and health agencies, and ECE agencies and service providers. A purposive sample of documents (n = 33) from 2020 to 2021 was analysed inductively and deductively combining readability, health numeracy and linguistic analyses and focusing on the most frequent actionable health advice topics. RESULTS: COVID-19 health advice most frequently related to hygiene, distancing and exclusion. Readability scores in 79% (n = 23) of documents were above the recommended grade 6 reading level for the public. Advice was delivered using direct linguistic strategies (n = 288), indirect strategies (n = 73), and frequent mitigating hedges (n = 142). Most numerical concepts were relatively simple, but lacked elaborative features (e.g., analogies) and/or required subjective interpretation. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 health advice available to the ECE sector included linguistic and numerical information open to mis/interpretation making it difficult to understand and implement. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Combining readability scores with measures of linguistic and numerical complexity offers a more holistic approach to assessing accessibility of health advice and improving health literacy among its recipients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dahm et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: