Physican handwriting legibility is as good (or bad) as everyone else

Archie Digital Collections

Show simple item record Schneider, Kirstie 2006-05-18T16:48:23Z 2006-05-18T16:48:23Z 2006-05-18T16:48:23Z
dc.description Public Health and Outcome I 8:44 AM Abstract 170 en
dc.description.abstract Purpose: To compare handwriting legibility among professions. Methods: A convenience sample, stratified by gender, of 20 right-handed volunteers each from 7 occupations, rapidly wrote the sentence “The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog” in <17 seconds. Legibility was scored by two methods. The number of malformed individual letters were visually judged by a single blinded investigator. Four investigators, blinded to subject characteristics, independently rated the global legibility of the writing samples on a 4-point scale: poor, fair, good, and excellent. Raters were tested with the kappa statistic. Characteristics and scores were compared using logit regression and post-hoc Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Scoring methods were compared by Spearman’s correlation. The study was powered to detect a difference of 25% across occupations. Results: Among 70 males and 70 females, with ages 18-64 years and 12-28 years of education, only education differed among groups. Legibility scores did not differ significantly by occupation, age or education. But legibility was significantly and consistently better in women. en
dc.format.extent 100352 bytes
dc.format.mimetype application/
dc.language.iso en_US en
dc.subject Handwriting en
dc.subject Legibility en
dc.subject Physician en
dc.title Physican handwriting legibility is as good (or bad) as everyone else en
dc.type Presentation en

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search Archie

Advanced Search


My Account