Ruslan Aghasiyev1, Berza Şen Yılmaz2. 1. Private Practice, İstanbul, Turkey. 2. Department of Orthodontics, Bezmialem Vakif University School of Dentistry, İstanbul, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the content of the informative websites related to orthodontic terms in Turkish and in English. METHODS: Five different orthodontic terms ("orthodontic appliances (ortodontik aygıtlar)," "orthodontic braces (ortodontik braketler)," "orthodontic elastics (ortodontik elastikler)," "orthognathic surgery (ortognatik cerrahi)," and "orthodontic treatment (ortodontik tedavi)") both in Turkish and in English were searched using Google. There were 25 websites evaluated for each term. A total of 137 different websites were evaluated with three measurement tools: DISCERN (questionnaire, University of Oxford, 1999) (quality of information), LIDA (v1.2 Minervation, 2007) (accessibility, usability, and reliability), and AChecker (v0.1 ATutor, 2011) (accessibility). RESULTS: The mean overall score of the quality of information was "good" for terms in Turkish and in English. The LIDA score was classified as "moderate" for terms in Turkish and in English. More accessibility errors were found on the Turkish websites than on the English counterparts. Most of the statistical evaluations between Turkish and English terms were insignificant. However, intragroup evaluation of the terms mostly showed significant differences. CONCLUSION: Accessibility, usability, and reliability; quality of information; and scores of access errors showed variations among Turkish and English sites. The collaboration of website designers and clinicians to increase the quality level of the websites is recommended.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the content of the informative websites related to orthodontic terms in Turkish and in English. METHODS: Five different orthodontic terms ("orthodontic appliances (ortodontik aygıtlar)," "orthodontic braces (ortodontik braketler)," "orthodontic elastics (ortodontik elastikler)," "orthognathic surgery (ortognatik cerrahi)," and "orthodontic treatment (ortodontik tedavi)") both in Turkish and in English were searched using Google. There were 25 websites evaluated for each term. A total of 137 different websites were evaluated with three measurement tools: DISCERN (questionnaire, University of Oxford, 1999) (quality of information), LIDA (v1.2 Minervation, 2007) (accessibility, usability, and reliability), and AChecker (v0.1 ATutor, 2011) (accessibility). RESULTS: The mean overall score of the quality of information was "good" for terms in Turkish and in English. The LIDA score was classified as "moderate" for terms in Turkish and in English. More accessibility errors were found on the Turkish websites than on the English counterparts. Most of the statistical evaluations between Turkish and English terms were insignificant. However, intragroup evaluation of the terms mostly showed significant differences. CONCLUSION: Accessibility, usability, and reliability; quality of information; and scores of access errors showed variations among Turkish and English sites. The collaboration of website designers and clinicians to increase the quality level of the websites is recommended.
Entities:
Keywords:
Internet; health information systems; medical informatics; orthodontics
Authors: G K Berland; M N Elliott; L S Morales; J I Algazy; R L Kravitz; M S Broder; D E Kanouse; J A Muñoz; J A Puyol; M Lara; K E Watkins; H Yang; E A McGlynn Journal: JAMA Date: 2001 May 23-30 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: M A Winker; A Flanagin; B Chi-Lum; J White; K Andrews; R L Kennett; C D DeAngelis; R A Musacchio Journal: JAMA Date: 2000 Mar 22-29 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Hege K Andreassen; Maria M Bujnowska-Fedak; Catherine E Chronaki; Roxana C Dumitru; Iveta Pudule; Silvina Santana; Henning Voss; Rolf Wynn Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2007-04-10 Impact factor: 3.295