The readability of websites providing information on liver transplantation and donation
Abstract views: 155
/ 
PDF downloads: 95
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26900/hsq.2523Keywords:
Liver Transplant, online information, organ donor, readabilityAbstract
Nowadays, many people prefer websites to access information about health problems. The readability levels of the content of these sites are important for informing patients. In this study, it was aimed to determine the readability levels of Turkish websites related to “Liver Transplantation and Donation”, one of the most important operations in the world. Through the Google search engine, 76 websites that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in the study and divided into 3 groups based on the account managers who uploaded the videos: health professionals, news sites and other sites. The readability levels of these sites were determined according to Ateşman and Çetinkaya Readability Indexes. Ateşman Readability Index was found as 68 in health professionals-hospital source, 59 in news site group and 57 in other sites group. Çetinkaya Readability Index was found as 49 in health professionals-hospital source, 43 in news site group and 40 in other sites group. It was determined that the 3 subgroups were at a mild level of difficulty according to the Ateşman Readability Index and at an educational level according to the Çetinkaya Readability Index. The Ateşman and Çetinkaya Readability Index results of websites managed by health professionals and hospitals were statistically higher than the website sources in the other category (p<0.05). The Ateşman and Çetinkaya indexes were found to be perfectly compatible with each other (p<0.001). It was observed that the readability level of Turkish websites on liver transplantation according to the Ateşman and Çetinkaya readability indexes was more difficult than it should be according to Turkey 2024 data. It is recommended to increase the readability levels of internet resources on liver transplantation and specially to increase the number of websites containing texts written by health professionals or to get support from experts in the field.
Downloads
References
Goetzinger AM, Blumenthal JA, OHayer CV, Babyak MA, Hoffman BM, Ong L, et al. Stress and coping in caregivers of patients awaiting solid organ transplantation. Clin Transplant. 2012;26:97-104. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2011.01431.x.
Meltzer LJ, Rodrigue JR. Psychological distress in caregivers of liver and lung transplant candidates. J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2001;8:173-80. doi: 10.1023/A:1011317603415.
Olbrisch ME, Benedict SM, Ashe K, Levenson JL. Psychological assessment and care of organ transplant patients. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2002;70:771-83. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.70.3.771.
OPTN, (2024 September 14). United States Network for Organ Sharing. Retrieved from: https://optn.transplant.hrsa/data/ (Accessed on Jan 18, 2025).
McCullough AJ, Mullen KD, Smanik EJ, Tabbaa M, Szauter K. Nutritional therapy and liver disease. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 1989;18:619-43.
Rodrigue JR, Dimitri N, Reed A, Antonellis T, Hanto DW, Curry M. Quality of life and psychosocial functioning of spouse/partner caregivers before and after liver transplantation. Clin Transplant. 2011;25:239-47. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2010.01224.x .
Cohen M, Katz D, Baruch Y. Stress among the family caregivers of liver transplant recipients. Prog Transplant. 2007;17:48-53. doi: 10.1177/152692480701700107.
Levenson JL, Olbrisch ME. Psychosocial evaluation of organ transplant candidates. A comparative survey of process, criteria, and outcomes in heart, liver, and kidney transplantation. Psychosomatics. 1993;34:314-23. doi: 10.1016/S0033-3182(93)71865-4.
List of people waiting for liver transplantation in Türkiye. Retrieved from: https://organkds.saglik.gov.tr/DSS/PUBLIC/WL_Liver.aspx. (Accessed on May 23, 2024).
Turkish Statistical Institute. Household Information Technology (IT) Usage Survey. (2024) Retrieved: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-(BT)-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2024-53492. (Accessed on Feb 12, 2025).
Paakkari L, Okan O. COVID-19: Health literacy is an underestimated problem. Lancet Public Health. 2020;5:249-50. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30086-4.
Deniz S. A Study on the e-Health Literacy and Cyberchondria Levels of Individuals [in Turkish]. İnsan&İnsan. 2020;7(24):84-96. doi: 10.29224/insanveinsan.674726.
Washington TA, Fanciullo GJ, Sorensen JA, Baird JC. Quality of chronic pain websites. Pain Med. 2008;9:994-1000. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2008.00419.x.
Daraz L, Macdermid JC, Wilkins S, Gibson J, Shaw L. The quality of websites addressing fibromyalgia: An assessment of quality and readability using standardised tools. BMJ Open. 2011;1(1):152. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000152.
Basavakumar D, Flegg M, Eccles J, Ghezzi P. Accuracy, completeness and accessibility of online information on fibromyalgia. Rheumatol Int. 2019;39:735-42. doi: 10.1007/s00296-019-04265-0.
Aaby A, Friis K, Christensen B, Rowlands G, Maindal HT. Health literacy is associated with health behaviour and self-reported health: A large population-based study in individuals with cardiovascular disease. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2017;24:1880-8. doi: 10.1177/2047487317729538.
Alioshkin Cheneguin A, Salvat Salvat I, Romay Barrero H, Torres Lacomba M. How good is online information on fibromyalgia? An analysis of quality and readability of websites on fibromyalgia in Spanish. BMJ Open. 2020;10:37065. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037065.
Kalyoncu MR, Memiş M. Consistency query and comparison of readability formulas created for Turkish [in Turkish]. J Mother Tong Edu. 2024;12:417-36. doi: 10.16916/aded.1434650.
Flesch R. A new readability yardstick. J Appl Psychol.1948;32:221-33. doi: 10.1037/h0057532.
Er A, Ay I, Horozoğlu CT. Evaluating Turkish readability and quality of Strabismus-Related websites. Cureus. 2024;16:58603. doi: 10.7759/cureus.58603.
Bujnowska-Fedak MM, Węgierek P. The impact of online health information on patient health behaviours and making decisions concerning health. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17:880. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17030880.
Scull A. Dr. Google will see you now: Google’s health information previews and implications for consumer health. Med Ref Serv Q. 2020;39:165-73. doi: 10.1080/02763869.2020.1726151.
Muse K, McManus F, Leung C, Meghreblian B, Williams JM. Cyberchondriasis: Fact or fiction? A preliminary examination of the relationship between health anxiety and searching for health information on the Internet. J Anxiety Disord. 2012;26:189-96. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2011.11.005.
Hoc A. Health literacy: Report of the council on scientific affairs. Ad Hoc Committee on health literacy for the council on scientific affairs, American Med Association. JAMA. 1999;281:552-7.
Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA. Helping patients decide: Ten steps to better risk communication. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:1436-43. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djr318
Klugman J. Human development report 2011. Sustainability and equity: A better future for all. Sustainability and equity: A better future for all (2011, November 2) UNDP-HDRO Human Development Reports. 2011.
Ay İE, Duranoğlu Y. An evaluation of the readability of package inserts of eye drops [in Turkish]. Anatol Clin. 2022;27:55-9. doi: 10.21673/anadoluklin.993863.
Akdere E, Karpuz S, Yılmaz R, Yılmaz H, Solak İ. Evaluation of readability and reliability of Turkish websites on low back pain. Aegean J Med Sci. 2024;1:18-23 doi: 10.33713/egetbd.1444781.
Sarı A, Kazan ED. How readable are antihypertensive drug inserts? J Health Sci Med. 2023;6:273-6. doi: 10.32322/jhsm.1213113.
Gül MC. Evaluation of the readability level of proton pump inhibitors prospectuses. Acta Medica Ruha 2023;1:541-7. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10057989.
Boztaş N, Özbilgin Ş, Öçmen E, Altuntaş G, Özkardeşler S, Hancı V, Günerli A. Evaluating the readibility of informed consent forms available before anaesthesia: A comparative study. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2014;42:140-4. doi: 10.5152/TJAR.2014.94547.
Akkuş M. Evaluation of the readability of antidepressant drug package inserts commonly used in psychiatry. Osmangazi J Med. 2023;45:689-95. doi: 10.20515/otd.1260211.
Sezin RK, Biçen ŞN. Examining the readability levels of online contents including voice health [in Turkish]. J Ear Nose Throat Head Neck Surgery. 2024;32(3):128-33. doi: 10.24179/kbbbbc.2024-103996.
TUIK. Turkish Statistical Institute National Education Statistics, 2023. (2024, May 30). Retrieved from: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Ulusal-Egitim-Istatistikleri-2023-53444. (Accessed on Feb 14, 2025).
Otu M, Karagözoğlu Ş. Investigating the websites in Turkey that providing information on fibromyalgia syndrome by readability, content and quality [in Turkish]. Turk J Osteoporos. 2022;28(1):19-25. doi: 10.4274/tod.galenos.2021.75508.
Poudel A, Adhikari A, Poudel S, Poudel A. Readability of online patient education materials related to liver transplantation in the United States. Transplantology. 2024;5(3):216-23. doi: 10.3390/transplantology5030021.
European Society for Organ Transplantation. ESOT guidelines. Retrieved from: https://esot.org/esot-guidelines/. (Accessed on Dec 14, 2024).
American Society of Transplantation. Caregiver toolkit: before, during, and after liver transplant: caregiver responsibilities. Retrieved from: https://www.myast.org/caregiver-toolkit/before-during-and-after-liver-transplant-caregiver-responsibilities. (Accessed on Jan 17, 2025).
Olbrisch ME. Ethical issues in psychological evaluation of patients for organ transplant surgery. Rehabil Pysc. 1996;41:53-71. doi: 10.1037/0090-5550.41.1.53.
Verma M, Horrow J, Carmody S, Navarro V. Unmet needs and burden of caregivers of patients being evaluated for a liver transplant are similar to those of cancer caregivers. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2024;41:391-7. doi: 10.1177/10499091231176297.
American Society of Transplantation. Caregiver toolkit. Retrieved from: https://www.myast.org/caregiver-toolkit. (Accessed on Feb 02, 2025).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Holistence Publications
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share and adapt the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Everyone who is listed as an author in this article should have made a substantial, direct, intellectual contribution to the work and should take public responsibility for it.
