Skip to main content

Table 3 SAM criteria and SAM scores for original versus revised handouts

From: Readability of patient education materials in ophthalmology: a single-institution study and systematic review

SAM Criteria SAM Score
Original Handouts (n = 12) Revised Handouts (n = 12) p value
Content (a) Purpose is evident 1.29 1.63 0.011
(b) Content about behaviors 1.25 1.71 0.033
(c) Scope is limited 1.88 1.92 0.341
(d) Summary or review included 0.63 1.38 0.003
Literacy demand (a) Reading grade level 0.33 1.25 <0.001
(b) Writing style, active voice 1.13 1.88 0.001
(c) Vocabulary 1.04 1.96 <0.001
(d) Context is given first 1.42 1.71 0.271
(e) Advance organizers 1.75 2.00 0.167
Layout and typography (a) Layout factors 0.88 1.96 <0.001
(b) Typography 1.63 2.00 0.026
(c) Subheadings (“chunking”) used 1.33 2.00 0.003
Learning stimulation and motivation (a) Interaction used 0.25 0.55 0.081
(b) Behaviors are modeled and specific 1.58 1.83 0.082
(c) Motivation--self-efficacy 1.55 1.92 0.015
Cultural appropriateness (a) Match in logic, language, experience 1.25 1.96 0.001
(b) Cultural image and examples N/A N/A N/A
Total SAM Score (%) (mean ± SD): 60 ± 7 88 ± 4 <0.001
  1. SAM Suitability Assessment of Materials, SD standard deviation
  2. SAM criteria are graded 0, 1, or 2, and total SAM score is reported as a percentage of points earned out of total possible points