Readability and DISCERN analysis of online resources on cochlear implants
Kerem Ersin1, Mısra Eren2, Halil Berkay Saldırım3
1İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Meslek Yüksekokulu, Odyometri Programı, İstanbul, Türkiye
2İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Odyoloji Anabilim Dalı, İstanbul, Türkiye
3İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi, Odyoloji Bölümü, İstanbul, Türkiye
Keywords: Cochlear implant, consumer health information, internet, patient education as topic, readability.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to comparatively evaluate the readability and content quality of patient information texts related to cochlear implants on Turkish-language web pages according to website type and authorship qualifications.
METHODS: Between September and October 2025, the first 100 Turkish-language websites retrieved using the keyword “cochlear implant” on the Google search engine were analyzed. Readability was assessed using the Ateşman and Çetinkaya-Uzun readability indices, and content quality was evaluated using the DISCERN instrument. Websites were classified as company, hospital, personal, or newspaper sites. Ear, nose, and throat (ENT)-based authorship, presence of references, and academic affiliation were recorded. All evaluations were conducted independently by two researchers.
RESULTS: Ateşman scores did not differ across the groups (p=0.557). The Çetinkaya-Uzun index showed significant differences; company, hospital, and personal sites scored higher (i.e., more difficult) than newspapers (p=0.001, p=0.005, p=0.001, respectively). Texts with references and ENT-based authorship had lower Çetinkaya-Uzun readability scores (p=0.016 and p=0.005, respectively). Academic affiliation did not affect readability (p=0.375). Among the groups, the DISCERN reliability scores were similar (p=0.211). Considering information quality, newspaper, hospital, and personal groups had higher scores than companies (p=0.022, p=0.027, p=0.008, respectively). Overall quality scores were higher for hospital and personal sources than for company and newspaper sites (p=0.015, p=0.017; p=0.007, p=0.004, respectively). Total DISCERN scores were higher for newspaper, hospital, and personal groups than for companies (p=0.028, p=0.034, p=0.011, respectively). Ear, nose, and throat-based authorship increased information quality and total scores (p=0.009 and p=0.012, respectively). Academic affiliation improved all DISCERN domains (p=0.001).
CONCLUSION: Newspaper websites demonstrated the poorest readability, while company websites constituted the lowest-scoring group in terms of content quality. Overall quality scores were higher for hospital-based and personal sources. Based on these findings, we believe that the use of plain language, a two-tiered presentation approach, and the standardization of transparency are necessary.