Readability Analysis of Turkish Patient Informing Texts about Teeth Whitening on the Internet: Cross-Sectional Study

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 34 Sayı: 4, 276 - 280, 15.10.2024

Muhammet Fidan

https://doi.org/10.17567/currresdentsci.1556038

Öz

Objective: Considering that the texts presented on the internet will be read by people of very different education levels, it is important to examine the readability of these texts. The aim of this study was to evaluate the readability analysis of Turkish patient information texts about teeth whitening on the internet.
Method: A Google search using the term “Teeth Whitening” revealed the top 100 websites. Turkish patient information texts on the 86 websites included in this study were evaluated according to the Atesman Readability Index. The information texts originated from dentists, specialist dentists, private health institutions, university hospitals, and newspapers. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test and descriptive statistics were used for statistical evaluation. Statistical significance level was accepted as P < .05.
Results: Atesman Readability Index score was 59.08 ± 8.14. According to the findings obtained in the research, 0% of the websites examined were rated as very easy, 7% as easy, 86% as moderately difficult, 5.8% as difficult, and 1.2% as very difficult. When the readability levels of the texts were examined according to grade levels, the following was found: 43% were grades 11th–12th , 43% grades 9th–10th, 7% grades 7th–8th, and 5.8% grade associate degree.
Conclusion: The readability of Turkish texts on teeth whitening on the internet was found to be of medium difficulty. When creating texts for the internet about teeth whitening, it would be beneficial to make them easier to read by using readability programs before they are published.
Keywords: Access to information, dentists, internet, teeth whitening

Anahtar Kelimeler

Access to information, dentists, internet, teeth whitening

Kaynakça

• 1. Beck F, Richard JB, Nguyen-Thanh V, Montagni I, Parizot I, Renahy E. Use of the internet as a health information resource among French young adults: results from a nationally representative survey. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(5):e128.
• 2. Bujnowska-Fedak MM. Trends in the use of the Internet for health purposes in Poland. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:194.
• 3. Eki̇nci̇ Y, Tutgun-Unal A, Tarhan N. A Literature review on digital health literacy. BAYTEREK | Int Academic Res. 2021;4(2):148–165.
• 4. TÜİK.(İnternet).https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-(BT)-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2021-37437. Access date: 05.02.2023
• 5. TÜİK.(İnternet).https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-(BT)-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2022-45587. Access date: 05.02.2023
• 6. Tan SSL, Goonawardene N. Internet health information seeking and the patient-physician relationship: A systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(1):e9.
• 7. Gokay GD, Gorurgoz C. Laminate veneer: A quality assessment of Turkish-Written internet information. Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci. 2021;27(4):660-666.
• 8. Yeap CK, Slack-Smith LM. Internet information on child oral health and the first dental visit. Aust Dent J. 2013;58(3):278–282.
• 9. Wångdahl J, Dahlberg K, Jaensson M, Nilsson U. Arabic version of the electronic health literacy scale in Arabic-Speaking individuals in Sweden: Prospective psychometric evaluation study. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(3):e24466.
• 10. Cheng C, Dunn M. Health literacy and the Internet: a study on the readability of Australian online health information. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2015;39(4):309–314.
• 11. Richards JC ve Schmidt R. Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. London: Longman. 4th Ed. 2010. p:482. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/44568181/ Longman_ Dictionary_of_Language_Teaching_and_Applied_Linguistics
• 12. Akbulut AS. İ Readability analysis of ınformation on the ınternet about clear aligner treatment. NEU Dent J. 2022;4(1):7–11.
• 13. Atesman E. Measuring readability in Turkish. AU Tömer Lang J. 1997;58:71–74.
• 14. Coban A. The review towards the consept of redeability. J Lang Lit Educ. 2014;9:96–111.
• 15. Ozduman ZC, Celik C. Tooth discolorations and bleaching treatments. 7tepeklinik. 2017;13(1):37–44.
• 16. Jayaratne YSN, Anderson NK, Zwahlen RA. Readability of websites containing information on dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(12):1319–1324.
• 17. Ozmen EE. Readability and contents evaluation o patient ınforming texts on orthognathic surgery in Turkish websites: Methodological study. Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci. 2023;29(1):1–6.
• 18. Yesilyurt ME, Karadeniz O, Gülel FE, Çağlar A, Uyar SG. Mean and expected years of schooling for provinces in Turkey. PJESS. 2016;3(1):1–7.
• 19. Degirmenci K. Evaluation of readability levels of Turkish ınternet sites providing ınformation about dental prosthesis: A qualitative research. Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci. 2022;28(4):905–912.
• 20. Basaran MM, Kuzucu I. The comparison of the readability of rhinoplasty information texts on surgeons web site between different specialisations. Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci. 2019;39(3):304–309.
• 21. Dilaver E, Kılınç DD, Dilaver E, Kılınç DD. Evaluation of quality and reliability of websites about orthognathic surgery using Google TrendsTM application. APOS Trends Orthod. 2020;10(1):46–49.
• 22. https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/all/turkey. Access date: 05.02.2023.