Readability Analysis of Turkish Internet Content on Varicose Veins
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15311586Keywords:
Health literacy, internet, search engines, varicose veinAbstract
Objective: Internet is one of the most widely used sources for health information. However, the comprehensibility of this content is critical for individuals' health literacy. This study examines the readability level of Turkish health content on “varicose veins” on the internet.
Methods: In the study, the contents of 30 websites ranked in the top 10 in Google, Yandex and Bing search engines for the word “varicose veins” were evaluated and 19 websites were analyzed after excluding the inappropriate ones. The texts were analyzed using two Turkish-specific readability formulas, Ateşman and Bezirci-Yılmaz formulas.
Results: According to Ateşman's formula, the average readability score of the texts was 54.0±6.1, indicating that these contents are comprehensible by individuals with 9th grade and above education level. Bezirci-Yılmaz scores averaged 10.6±2.1, indicating that some texts were simple while others were quite complex.
Conclusion: The vast majority of the health content on the analyzed websites requires a reading level above the recommended education grade level. This may negatively affect the access to and understanding of information, especially by individuals with low education levels. Therefore, presenting health content in a simpler and more understandable language would be an important step in increasing the overall health literacy of the population.
References
1. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. Hane Halkı Bilişim Teknolojileri Kullanım Araştırması 2024 [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2025 Mar 15]. Available from: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-(BT)-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2024-53492.
2. Atay C, Alanyalı M, Uyan SB, Baş C. Arama motoru optimizasyonu. Akademik Bilişim. 2010;10:10-12.
3. Demirci Ş, Uğurluoğlu Ö, Konca M, Çakmak C. Socio‐demographic characteristics affect health information seeking on the Internet in Turkey. Health Information & Libraries Journal. 2021;38(4):304-312.
4. Bachl M, Link E, Mangold F, Stier S. Search engine use for health-related purposes: Behavioral data on online health information-seeking in Germany. Health Communication. 2024;39(8):1651-1664.
5. Gürsoy E, Taştan K, Nas MA, Kartal İBY. Evaluation of summary of product characteristics and patient information leaflet of the best-selling drugs in Turkey in terms of readability. İstanbul Journal of Pharmacy. 2022;52(3):342-348.
6. Ay IE, Duranoğlu Y. Göz damlası prospektüslerinin okunabilirlik düzeyinin değerlendirilmesi. Anatolian Clinic the Journal of Medical Sciences. 2022;27(1):55-59.
7. Ay IE, Doğan M. An evaluation of the comprehensibility levels of ophthalmology surgical consent forms. Cureus. 2021;13(7):e17189.
8. Er A, Ay IE, Ceran TH. Evaluating Turkish readability and quality of strabismus-related websites. Cureus. 2024;16(4):e17189.
9. Temel MH, Erden Y, Bağcıer F. Information quality and readability: ChatGPT's responses to the most common questions about spinal cord injury. World Neurosurgery. 2024;181:e1138-e1144.
10. Restrepo E, Ko N, Warner ET. An evaluation of readability and understandability of online education materials for breast cancer survivors. Journal of Cancer Survivorship. 2024;18(2):457-465.
11. Novasta Bilişim Ltd. Şti. Türkiye’deki arama motoru kullanım oranları [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2025 Mar 15]. Available from: https://novasta.com.tr/turkiyede-ki-arama-motoru-kullanim-oranlari/
12. Ateşman E. Türkçede okunabilirliğin ölçülmesi. Dil Dergisi. 1997;58:71-74.
13. Bezirci B, Yılmaz AE. Metinlerin okunabilirliğinin ölçülmesi üzerine bir yazılım kütüphanesi ve Türkçe için yeni bir okunabilirlik ölçütü. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen ve Mühendislik Dergisi. 2010;12(3):49-62.
14. Gu JZ, Baird GL, Guevara AE, Sohn YJ, Lydston M, Doyle C, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of English language online patient education materials in breast cancer: Is readability the only story? The Breast. 2024;103:102322.
15. Keselman A, Logan R, Smith CA, Leroy G, Zeng-Treitler Q. Developing informatics tools and strategies for consumer-centered health communication. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2008;15(4):473-483.
16. Saldırım HB, Eren M, Kurtuluş N, Kırlaroğlu SN, Şerbetçioğlu MB. Tinnitus ile ilgili çevrim içi hasta bilgilendirme materyallerinin okunabilirliğinin değerlendirilmesi. Balkan Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi. 2023;2(1):1-6.
17. Eyüboğlu E. Ebeveynler ve online sağlık bilgisi arama davranışı: sağlık okuryazarlığı kapsamında bir inceleme. TRT Akademi. 2023;8(19):904-933.
18. Berland GK, et al. Health information on the Internet: Accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA. 2001;285(20):2612-2621.
19. McInnes N, Haglund BJ. Readability of online health information: Implications for health literacy. Informatics for Health and Social Care. 2011;36(4):173-189.
20. Temur T. Okunabilirlik (Readability) Kavramı. Türklük Bilimi Araştırmaları. 2003;13:169-179.
21. Orgun F, Paylan Akkoç C. Hasta eğitim materyallerinin değerlendirilmesi: Okunabilirlik formülleri ve materyal değerlendirme araçları. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Nursing Sciences. 2020;12(3):e1-e8.
22. T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı. Türkiye Sağlık Okuryazarlığı Araştırması [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2025 Mar 15]. Available from: https://ekutuphane.saglik.gov.tr/Ekutuphane/kitaplar/SOYA%20RAPOR.pdf
23. Daraz L, Morrow AS, Ponce OJ, et al. Readability of online health information: A meta-narrative systematic review. American Journal of Medical Quality. 2018;33(5):487-492.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 MURAT EROĞLU
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
