{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01692524682651622, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.454545454545454, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
THE READABILIN OF HEALTH‐CARE LITERATURE

The readability of health‐related pamphlets intended for the British public was compared with that of English national newspapers. Many of the pamphlets were found to be less readable than desirable. Pamphlets issued by government departments (principally the Department of Health and Social Security) were assessed as particularly difficult to read, but some specialist and commercially produced pamphlets also gave cause for concern. A small number of specially produced ‘baby books’ were found to have more suitable levels of prose difficulty. It is suggested that readability formulae can be a useful tool in the initial assessment of health education literature.