Recommended characteristics and processes for writing lay summaries of healthcare evidence: a co-created scoping review and consultation exercise

Table 9 Comparing the importance of the EU characteristics between literature results and participants’ opinions

EU characteristics (Top 3rd)	Very Important	Moderately Important	Less Important	EU characteristics (Middle 3rd)	Very Important	Moderately Important	Less Important	EU characteristics (Bottom 3rd)	Very Important	Moderately Important	Less Important
No jargon	P, L			Link to study paper	P	L		Black and white			P, L
No long/complex sentence	P, L			Avoid promotional language		P(d), L		No unnecessary images		P	L
Active Voice	P, L			Don’t oversimplify	P	L		No CAPS or underline			P, L
Define terms	P, L			Glossary	P	L		Graphs having a ‘0’		P	L
Use visuals	P, L			Words not numbers in results		L	P	Cartoons and Illustrations			P, L
Use reading test	L		P	Timeline		L	P	Index in PubMed			P, L
Links to additional info	L		P	Big picture first	P(d)	L		Spell out abbreviations	P		L
State funder	P			Person, not disability	P(d)	L		Avoid complex images	P		L
Bullets	L	P(d)		Local language	P	L		No decimals			P, L
Use absolute numbers	L		P	English version		P, L		12-point font			P, L
Available soon	P, L			Culturally valid	P	L		Visuals clear in print			P, L
Factual/objective	P, L			Label/describe visuals	P	L		Inclusive language	P		L
White space	L	P(d)		Positive wording		P, L

ISSN: 2056-7529