Methodology

How we build a criteria-based comparison — the fields we record, where the data comes from, and how we mark what we could not verify.

Our goal is a like-for-like comparison, not a ranking of “the best” clinic. We do not describe any provider as best, top, leading or number one. Instead we record the same public, checkable facts for each clinic so a reader can weigh them against their own priorities.

The criteria we record

• Public Google rating The average star rating shown on a clinic’s public Google Business Profile at the time of checking. A rating is only meaningful alongside the number of reviews behind it, so we always show both together.
• Review count (volume) How many public reviews the rating is based on. A 4.9 from 40 reviews and a 4.7 from 4,000 reviews describe very different amounts of evidence; we present the raw count and let the reader judge.
• Stated international-patient services Whether the clinic publicly advertises services aimed at overseas patients — for example airport transfers, accommodation coordination, remote consultation, or a dedicated international department. We record what the clinic states; we do not assess quality.
• Languages offered The languages a clinic publicly says it supports for patient communication, as listed on its own website. This affects how easily a non-Turkish-speaking patient can give informed consent and understand a treatment plan.
• Published accreditation & registration Any accreditation or certification a clinic publicly displays (for example a Ministry of Health health-tourism authorisation, or an international quality certification). We note what is claimed and flag that readers should verify it at source.
• District / location The neighbourhood or district of the clinic, which is relevant to travel and logistics. Groups with several branches are noted as multi-branch.

Where the data comes from

Every recorded field is drawn from a source a reader could check independently:

• The clinic’s own public website (for district, languages, stated services and claimed accreditation).
• Public business listings and profiles (for the rating and review count shown to the public).

We do not use private data, patient records, or information supplied by clinics in exchange for placement. Where a source is a specific page, we cite it.

How we handle data we could not verify

If we cannot independently confirm a field from a public source at the time of compiling, we mark it data pending verification instead of estimating or filling it in. Rating and review figures in particular change frequently, and automated collection can be blocked, so an unverified label is common and honest — not a gap we paper over.

Dating and re-verification

Each comparison table shows a last verified date. Public ratings, review counts and even branch locations move over time, so we treat each table as a dated snapshot. We recommend confirming any figure directly with the clinic before making a decision, and we re-review tables periodically.

What we deliberately exclude

• Superlative or ranking claims (best, top, cheapest, number one).
• Patient testimonials and reviews reproduced on this site.
• Before-and-after treatment photographs.
• Clinic-specific price promises. We publish only general guide price ranges, because a real price depends on the individual case.

These exclusions keep the guide comparative and factual, and align with health-service advertising rules that restrict promotional and superlative content in this field.

Corrections

If a clinic or reader believes a recorded fact is out of date or wrong, we welcome a correction with a public source. See About & editorial policy for how to reach us.