Dijital Periodontal Arama Talebi ve İngilizce Web Tabanlı Bilgi Kalitesi: Dünya Genelindeki Google Trends Bölgelerinde İnfodemiyolojik Değerlendirme

Öz

Amaç Bu çalışmanın amacı, periodontal hastalıklara ilişkin dünya genelindeki çevrim içi arama davranışını değerlendirmek ve toplumun bilgi arama talebinin İngilizce web tabanlı sağlık bilgilerinin kalite, güvenilirlik, okunabilirlik ve içerik bütünlüğü ile ne ölçüde örtüştüğünü incelemektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler Ocak 2019-Aralık 2025 dönemine ait periodontal hastalık ilişkili terimler için Google Trends göreceli arama hacmi verileri kullanılarak kesitsel infodemiyolojik bir çalışma olarak uygulandı. Arama ilgisi dünya genelinde ve altı Google Trends dünya bölgesinde değerlendirildi; aynı terimlerle elde edilen İngilizce ilk sayfa Google sonuçları kalite analiziyle karşılaştırıldı. Web siteleri JAMA ölçütleri, DISCERN ölçeği, pilot test edilmiş içerik bütünlüğü kriterleri ve okunabilirlik indeksleri kullanılarak değerlendirildi. Bulgular Küresel arama ilgisi tüm terimlerde anlamlı artış gösterdi; en yüksek göreceli artış “periodontitis” (+%53,6; P < 0.001) ve “gingivitis” (+%41,0; p = 0.002) terimlerinde izlendi. 2025 yılı için en yüksek medyan göreceli arama hacimleri “gum disease” (RSV = 67) ve “bleeding gums” (RSV = 61) terimlerinde saptandı. Üniversite/kamu kurumu siteleri ticari klinik sitelerine göre daha yüksek JAMA (3.42 ± 0.58’e karşı 1.96 ± 0.81) ve DISCERN skorlarına (66.8 ± 8.7’ye karşı 45.7 ± 12.1; P < 0.001) sahipti. Arama hacmi ile DISCERN skoru arasında anlamlı ilişki yoktu (p = 0.241). Sonuç Periodontal hastalıklara yönelik çevrim içi bilgi talebi dünya genelinde yüksektir; ancak İngilizce ilk sayfa Google sonuçlarında karşılaşılan bilginin kalitesi ve okunabilirliği tutarsızdır. Dijital periodontal sağlık içerikleri şeffaf yazarlık, kanıta dayalı bilgi, düzenli güncelleme ve hasta odaklı okunabilirlik ilkeleriyle geliştirilmelidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• arama motoru
• infodemiyoloji
• periodontal hastalık
• sağlık bilgi kalitesi

Destekleyen Kurum

Yazarlar bu çalışmanın herhangi bir finansal destek almadığını beyan ederler.

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışmada, kamuya açık, anonimleştirilmiş, toplu çevrimiçi arama verileri ve kamuya açık web sayfaları kullanılmıştır. İnsan katılımcı, hasta kaydı, biyolojik örnek veya tanımlanabilir kişisel veri kullanılmamıştır. Bu nedenle, bu çalışma için etik kurul onayı gerekmemiştir.

Digital Periodontal Search Demand and English-Language Web-Based Information Quality: An Infodemiological Assessment Across Worldwide Google Trends Regions

Öz

Objectives This study aimed to evaluate worldwide online search behavior related to periodontal diseases and to examine whether public search demand is aligned with the quality, reliability, readability, and completeness of English-language web-based health information. Material and Methods A cross-sectional infodemiological study was conducted using Google Trends relative search volume data for periodontal disease-related terms between January 2019 and December 2025. Search interest was assessed globally and across six Google Trends world regions. In parallel, English-language first-page Google results retrieved for the same terms were evaluated. Website quality was assessed using JAMA benchmarks, DISCERN, a pilot-tested content completeness score, and readability indices. Correlation and multivariable regression analyses were performed. Results Global search interest increased significantly from 2019 to 2025 for all evaluated terms, with the largest relative increase for "periodontitis" (+53.6%, P < 0.001) and "gingivitis" (+41.0%, p = 0.002). The highest median 2025 relative search volumes were observed for "gum disease" (RSV = 67) and "bleeding gums" (RSV = 61). University/governmental websites showed higher JAMA (3.42 ± 0.58) and DISCERN scores (66.8 ± 8.7) than commercial clinic websites (1.96 ± 0.81 and 45.7 ± 12.1, respectively; P < 0.001). Search volume was not significantly associated with DISCERN score (p = 0.241). Conclusion Periodontal disease-related search demand is high worldwide; however, the English-language information encountered through first-page Google results remains inconsistent in quality and readability. Digital periodontal health strategies should prioritize transparent authorship, evidence-based content, periodic updating, and patient-centered readability.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• health information quality
• infodemiology
• periodontal diseas
• search engine

Destekleyen Kurum

The authors declare that this study received no financial support.

Etik Beyan

This study used publicly available, anonymized, aggregate online search data and publicly accessible web pages. No human participants, patient records, biological samples, or identifiable personal data were used. Therefore, ethics committee approval was not required for this study.

Kaynakça

1. Caton JG, Armitage G, Berglundh T, et al. A new classification scheme for periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions: introduction and key changes from the 1999 classification. J Clin Periodontol. 2018; 45: S1-8. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12935
2. Tonetti MS, Greenwell H, Kornman KS. Staging and grading of periodontitis: framework and proposal of a new classification and case definition. J Clin Periodontol. 2018; 45: S149-61. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12945
3. Kassebaum NJ, Bernabe E, Dahiya M, et al. Global burden of severe periodontitis in 1990-2010: a systematic review and meta-regression. J Dent Res. 2014; 93: 1045-53. doi: 10.1177/0022034514552491
4. Bernabe E, Marcenes W, Hernandez CR, et al. Global, regional, and national levels and trends in burden of oral conditions from 1990 to 2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease 2017 Study. J Dent Res. 2020; 99:362-73. doi: 10.1177/0022034520908533
5. Peres MA, Macpherson LMD, Weyant RJ, et al. Oral diseases: a global public health challenge. Lancet. 2019; 394: 249-60. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31146-8
6. Eysenbach G. Infodemiology: the epidemiology of misinformation. Am J Med. 2002; 113: 763-5. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9343(02)01473-0
7. Eysenbach G. Infodemiology and infoveillance: framework for an emerging set of public health informatics methods to analyze search, communication and publication behavior on the Internet. J Med Internet Res. 2009; 11: E11. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1157
8. Nuti SV, Wayda B, Ranasinghe I, et al. The use of Google Trends in health care research: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2014; 9: E109583. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109583

9. Mavragani A, Ochoa G. Google Trends in infodemiology and infoveillance: methodology framework. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2019; 5: E13439. doi: 10.2196/13439
10. Patthi B, Kumar JK, Singla A, et al. Global search trends of oral problems using Google Trends from 2004 to 2016: an exploratory analysis. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017; 11: ZC12-6. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/26658.10564
11. Uner DD, Izol BS. Is Google Trends a reliable way to determine digital dental epidemiology? Int Dent Res. 2021; 11: 38-46. doi: 10.5577/intdentres.2021.vol11.suppl1.7
12. Kanmaz B, Buduneli N. Evaluation of information quality on the internet for periodontal disease patients. Oral Dis. 2021; 27: 348-56. doi: 10.1111/odi.13546
13. Beaumont J, Cook N. Analysis of types and language used in online information available to patients with periodontitis. Br Dent J. 2023; 234: 253-8. doi: 10.1038/s41415-023-5525-2
14. Groenewegen H, Vissink A, Spijkervet FKL, et al. Quality assessment of internet information regarding periodontitis in persons living with HIV. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024; 21: 857. doi: 10.3390/ijerph21070857
15. Mak WWN, Kaur S, Meade MJ. A cross-sectional study of the quality of online information on periodontal surgery. Clin Exp Dent Res. 2025; 11: E70195. doi: 10.1002/cre2.70195
16. Aboalshamat K, Alkiyadi S, Alsaleh S, et al. Quality and readability of web-based information on dental caries in Arabic: an infodemiological study. BMC Oral Health. 2023; 23: 970. doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03564-4
17. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: caveant lector et viewor-let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA. 1997; 277: 1244-5. doi: 10.1001/jama.1997.03540390074039
18. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, et al. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999; 53: 105-11. doi: 10.1136/jech.53.2.105
19. McInnes N, Haglund BJA. Readability of online health information: implications for health literacy. Inform Health Soc Care. 2011; 36: 173-89. doi: 10.3109/17538157.2010.542529
20. Daraz L, Morrow AS, Ponce OJ, et al. Readability of online health information: a meta-narrative systematic review. Am J Med Qual. 2018; 33: 487-92. doi: 10.1177/1062860617751639
21. Scannapieco FA, Gershovich E. The prevention of periodontal disease-an overview. Periodontol 2000. 2020; 84: 9-13. doi: 10.1111/prd.12330
22. Chapple ILC, Van der Weijden F, Doerfer C, et al. Primary prevention of periodontitis: managing gingivitis. J Clin Periodontol. 2015; 42: S71-6. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12366
23. Jepsen S, Blanco J, Buchalla W, et al. Prevention and control of dental caries and periodontal diseases at individual and population level: consensus report. J Clin Periodontol. 2017;44: S85-93. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12687