To determine the readability of Internet nutrition education materials for the general population and vulnerable populations – Hispanic Americans, Blacks, Asian Americans, Native Americans, and older adults, a convenience sample of 497 Internet nutrition education materials was derived. These included for-profit, not-for-profit, and federal sources of Internet nutrition education materials. The SMOG readability formula was applied to determine the reading level of 497 nutrition education materials, including 60 health risk appraisals. The reading level differential of each nutrition education material was calculated by subtracting the recommended from actual reading level of the general population and vulnerable populations. ANOVA, non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis, Spearman’s rank correlation, and Mann-Whitney tests were used. Bonferroni’s adjustments were made for variables with more than two categories were used. On average, nutrition education materials were written two grade levels higher than the reading level of the general population, and six grade levels higher than their reading level for vulnerable groups – non-Whites and older adults. Federal materials were equally likely to be written at fifth grade (49.8%) and eighth grade (50.2%). Only 57.2% of not-for-profit materials were written at fifth grade reading level, and 42.8% at eighth grade level. Nutrition education materials on osteoporosis had significantly higher reading levels (12.00 ± 2.2) than other topics. There was a significant negative correlation between reading level and cost of nutrition education materials.

It is imperative for nutrition educators to field test nutrition education materials with the target audience to maximize understanding.

reading level, readability, ethnic minorities, non-whites, vulnerable populations.