Hostname: page-component-669899f699-swprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T22:45:12.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Evaluation of the Readability, Quality, and Content of Online Disaster Preparedness Materials for the Society

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 December 2024

Bengisu Karagöz Open the ORCID record for Bengisu Karagöz [Opens in a new window] ,
F. Nehir Öznur Muz Open the ORCID record for F. Nehir Öznur Muz [Opens in a new window] ,
Sibel Sert Open the ORCID record for Sibel Sert [Opens in a new window] ,
Oğuz Han Aydilek Open the ORCID record for Oğuz Han Aydilek [Opens in a new window] ,
M. Amine Altındag Open the ORCID record for M. Amine Altındag [Opens in a new window] ,
Selma Metintaş Open the ORCID record for Selma Metintaş [Opens in a new window]  and
M. Fatih Önsüz Open the ORCID record for M. Fatih Önsüz [Opens in a new window]
Bengisu Karagöz*
Affiliation:
Medical Faculty, Department of Public Health, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey
F. Nehir Öznur Muz
Affiliation:
Medical Faculty, Department of Public Health, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey
Sibel Sert
Affiliation:
Medical Faculty, Department of Public Health, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey
Oğuz Han Aydilek
Affiliation:
Medical Faculty, Department of Public Health, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey
M. Amine Altındag
Affiliation:
Department of Underwater and Hyperbaric Medicine, Gulhane Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
Selma Metintaş
Affiliation:
Medical Faculty, Department of Public Health, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey
M. Fatih Önsüz
Affiliation:
Medical Faculty, Department of Public Health, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey
*
Corresponding author: Bengisu Karagöz; Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives

A useful way to prepare the public for disasters is to teach them where to get information. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the readability and appropriateness of the content of websites prepared for the public on disaster preparedness.

Methods

In September-October 2022, we evaluated 95 disaster preparedness websites (intended for the public) using the Ateşman Readability Index, JAMA criteria, DISCERN, and a new researcher-created content comparison form. Evaluation scores were compared according to information sources.

Results

Of the websites included in the research, 45.2% represented government institutions (GIG), 38.0% non-profit organizations (NPOG), 8.4% municipal organizations (MOG), and 8.4% other organizations (OG). Those which scored above average on the websites were 36.8% on the content evaluation, 51.6% on the DISCERN scale, 53.7% on the Ateşman Readability Index, and 55.8% on the JAMA criteria. The content evaluation form showed that the scores of the websites belonging to the MOG were higher than the scores of the other websites. Others group websites also scored higher than altered websites on the JAMA criteria.

Conclusions

The study revealed that websites created to increase public knowledge on disaster preparedness are not good enough in terms of readability, quality, and content.

Keywords

natural disastersdisaster managementInternetreadability
Type
Original Research
Information
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness , Volume 18 , 2024 , e304
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Society for Disaster Medicine and Public Health, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Number of earthquakes, by country 2016 | Statista. Accessed December 7, 2022. https://www.statista.com/statistics/269648/number-of-earthquakes-by-country/Google Scholar
2019 Overview of Disaster Management and Natural Disaster Statistics. Accessed December 7, 2022. https://www.afad.gov.tr/Google Scholar
Public EM-DAT Platform. Accessed December 7, 2022. https://public.emdat.be/Google Scholar
Measurement in Engineering, Architecture and Planning April, 2021. Accessed December 7, 2022. http://olcuistanbul.org/Google Scholar
Seneviratne, K, Baldry, D, Pathirage, C, et al. Disaster knowledge factors in managing disasters successfully. Int J Strateg Prop Manag. 2010;14(4):376–390. doi:10.3846/IJSPM.2010.28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, J, McClure, J, Wilson, M. What a difference a year makes: how immediate and anniversary media reports influence judgements about earthquakes. Asian J Soc Psychol. 2002;5(3):169–185. doi:10.1111/1467-839X.00102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TÜİK Organisation. Accessed December 10, 2022. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-(BT)-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2021-37437Google Scholar
TÜİK Kurumsal. Accessed December 11, 2022. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Cocuklarda-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2021-41132Google Scholar
So, M, Franks, JL, Cree, RA et al. An evaluation of the literacy demands of online natural disaster preparedness materials for families. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2020;14(4):449–458. doi:10.1017/DMP.2019.62CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedman, DB, Tanwar, M, Richter, JVE. Evaluation of online disaster and emergency preparedness resources. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2008;23(5):438–446. doi:10.1017/S1049023X00006178CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hesse, BW, Nelson, DE, Kreps, GL, et al. Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the Internet and its implications for health care providers: findings from the First Health Information National Trends Survey. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165(22):2618–2624. doi:10.1001/ARCHINTE.165.22.2618CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turkey Search Engines Market Share in 2022 | Similarweb. Accessed December 20, 2022. https://www.similarweb.com/engines/turkey/Google Scholar
Bozkurt, A, Sahin, B, Bagci, Z., Evaluation of readability and content of texts on autism spectrum disorder. ESTUDAM Public Health Journal. 2022;7(2):291–300. doi:10.35232/estudamhsd.1035882Google Scholar
Ateşman, E. Measuring readability in Turkish. AU TOMER Language Journal. 1997;(58):171–174.Google Scholar
Dubay, WH. The Principles of Readability. Published 2004. Accessed December 14, 2022. http://www.impact-information.comGoogle Scholar
Goldbort, R. Readable writing by scientists and researchers. J Environ Health. 2001;63(8):40. Accessed December 14, 2022. https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=HRCA&sw=w&issn=00220892&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA73959760&sid=googleScholar&linkaccess=fulltextGoogle ScholarPubMed
Temur, T. The concept of readability. Journal of Turkish Studies Research. 2003;13(13):169–180.Google Scholar
Turkish Readability Index. Accessed September 27, 2022. http://okunabilirlikindeksi.com/Google Scholar
Flesch, R. A new readability yardstick. J App Psychol. 1948;32(3):221–233. doi:10.1037/H0057532CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silberg, WM, Lundberg, GD, Musacchio, RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant Lector et Viewor—Let the Reader and Viewer Beware. JAMA. 1997;277(15):1244–1245. doi:10.1001/JAMA.1997.03540390074039CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charnock, D, Shepperd, S, Needham, G et al. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health (1978). 1999;53(2):105–111. doi:10.1136/JECH.53.2.105CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
911 for Emergency Services | OUC. Accessed December 7, 2023. https://ouc.dc.gov/page/911-for-emergency-servicesGoogle Scholar
T.C. Ministry of Interior Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency. Accessed October 2, 2022. https://www.afad.gov.tr/Google Scholar
GEA Search and Rescue – Be Prepared, Stay Safe. Accessed October 2, 2022. https://gea.org.tr/en/home-en/Google Scholar
AKUT Search and Rescue Association | Turkish USAR Team. Accessed October 2, 2022. https://www.akut.org.tr/enGoogle Scholar
Lee, JS, De Simone, F, Ebrahimi, T. Influence of audio-visual attention on perceived quality of standard definition multimedia content. United States, San Diego. 2009 International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience; 2009:13–18. doi:10.1109/QOMEX.2009.5246983Google Scholar
2013 Turkey Demographic and Health Survey. The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) “Support Programme for Research and Development Projects of Public Institutions” (KAMAG). Published 2014. Accessed December 27, 2022. www.hips.hacettepe.edu.trGoogle Scholar
Tolu, S. A New Perspective on Readability and Content Assessment of Patient Information Texts Published on the Internet Sites on Lymphedema. Published 2018. doi:10.26579/jocrehes_8.2.27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chall, J, Zakaluk, B, Readibility, Samuels S.: The Beginning Years. International Reading Association; 1988.Google Scholar
Gokay, G, Gorurgoz, C, Veneer, L.: Quality assessment of information on Turkish websites. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Dental Sciences. 2021;27(4):660–666. doi:10.5336/DENTALSCI.2020-79291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goniewicz, K, Burkle, FM. Disaster early warning systems: the potential role and limitations of emerging text and data messaging mitigation capabilities. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2019;13(4):709–712. doi:10.1017/DMP.2018.171CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, LM, Haun, JN, Peterson, L. A proposed disaster literacy model. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2014;8(3):267–275. doi:10.1017/DMP.2014.43CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed