Establish scope with clinical and legal owners
A technical website audit can inspect accessibility, broken links and incorrect institutional information; it cannot create permission to advertise. The Ministry’s current health-promotion FAQ explicitly includes clinical psychologists in the relevant professional scope and explains domestic sponsored-promotion restrictions. A narrow exception following a facility’s opening does not authorize an ongoing advertising campaign.
Verify the actual licence, staff roles and permitted service descriptions against existing documents. The marketing team cannot substitute its judgement for a qualification or licensing decision. An institutional owner manages legal review, while the authorized clinical professional approves health-related statements. Record scope, document date, approved wording and the trigger for another review. A website may function perfectly while still displaying incorrect information after a professional leaves or an authorized service changes. Treat those events as publication dependencies rather than waiting for a complaint to reveal outdated pages.
Match institutional and professional details to evidence
Business Profile maintenance should prioritize accurate address, telephone, opening information and current institutional name. Consistency does not guarantee rankings or more appointments. Use verified education and professional titles on staff pages. Do not transform a certificate into an additional specialist title; the institution’s authorized owner must determine the appropriate wording and supporting evidence.
Make information updates understandable to the reader. Room photographs, directions and accessibility details should represent the actual premises. Do not manufacture branch pages for districts with no real location. When the profile and website show different phone numbers, identify the approved record before correcting and checking both surfaces. Use a concrete acceptance task, such as finding the address and opening hours, in a controlled review. This produces an assessable deliverable, whereas assuming that a pastel color automatically creates trust or appointments gives the team no reliable evidence to accept.
FROM READING TO A NEXT STEP
Review the administrative website scope
We can define technical information, access and appointment-administration work with the institution’s authorized owners.
Publish information after authorized professional review
Content production support can assist with non-directive information approved by an authorized professional. The official regulation text limits healthcare information to qualified professionals. An explanation of clinical practice should not diagnose the reader through a symptom checklist or promise that a particular method will certainly resolve a condition.
Keep a publication record for the question addressed, excluded topics and actual reviewer. Do not invent an author or name someone who did not inspect the material. Explain terms in accessible language without erasing uncertainty. Show publication and update dates and a way to reach the editor. When the evidence changes, reassess the affected statement instead of merely replacing the year. Arrange navigation around the administrative or informational question a reader needs answered. Useful information does not require converting each article into a pressured appointment funnel.
Institutional information
The institutional owner approves address, opening and verified staff details. A change to a branch or professional role triggers another check.
General information
The authorized clinician checks scientific explanation and scope. Do not present the material as a diagnostic tool or individualized treatment instruction.
Administrative process
The operations owner verifies contact and appointment steps. An acknowledgement of receipt is not a clinical assessment or a confirmed appointment.
Separate appointment administration from healthcare decisions
Appointment administration automation should be assessed only within the institution’s approved availability, contact and confirmation process. Avoid requesting unnecessary symptoms, diagnoses, medication or therapy history in an initial form. Free-text fields can also contain sensitive information. Review their necessity, access and retention purpose with the institution’s data owner before adding them to a general contact journey.
The current KVKK explanation treats health information as special-category data requiring applicable processing conditions and sufficient safeguards. A generic consent checkbox does not resolve every purpose. Distinguish receipt, a proposed time and a confirmed appointment. Automated messages should not diagnose, assess a crisis or recommend treatment. An authorized clinician determines emergency and service-boundary wording. Check conflicting times, cancellation and incorrect contact details with synthetic data in a controlled environment; do not create a live patient enquiry to prove the system works.
Accept the implementation through data flow and retesting
A technical measurement review in a health context should first establish what must never be sent to external advertising tools. Meta’s Business Tools Terms prohibit directly or indirectly health-based data and event, conversion or audience criteria reflecting, implying or based on sensitive categories. Renaming a field does not remove that restriction.
The technical owner should inspect whether condition-page URLs, form content or appointment context reaches advertising tools. In an internal system integration, make separate access decisions for necessary administrative records and clinical information. Operational findings can include broken forms, unanswered administrative requests or conflicting times; none establishes treatment success. Include an owner, correction evidence and review trigger in each acceptance record. A change to a clinician, form or third-party tool does not automatically inherit the previous approval. Repeat the affected scenario before the new configuration is accepted.
| Check | Acceptance owner | Review trigger |
|---|---|---|
| Titles and institution details | Authorized institutional owner | Role or licensed scope changes |
| Health information | Authorized clinician | Evidence or service scope changes |
| Appointment administration | Operations owner | Availability or notification changes |
| External data transfer | Technical and data owners | Form or third-party tool changes |
BEFORE YOU DECIDE
Frequently asked questions
Does this guide recommend clinic advertising?
No. It concerns verified information and administrative website maintenance for healthcare services in Turkey. It does not offer routine paid domestic patient acquisition. The institution’s authorized owners must assess its actual legal status and current rules.
Does naming a professional guarantee rankings?
No. Actual review and accurate titles explain responsibility for information. A name alone cannot guarantee rankings, trust, appointments or treatment outcomes. Never describe someone as an approving reviewer if they did not inspect the material.
Should the first form ask why someone is attending?
Evaluate whether the information is necessary for administration. Free text can contain health information and needs its own access, retention and processing assessment. Avoid unnecessary clinical detail in a general website contact form.
Can visitors become a remarketing audience?
This guide does not recommend creating remarketing audiences from a healthcare context. Data and criteria reflecting or implying health status are subject to platform restrictions. Generic cookie consent must not be interpreted as permission for prohibited data transfer.
Which outcomes can the team accept?
Accurate institution details, professionally reviewed information, accessible contact and a functioning administrative confirmation flow are concrete deliverables. Accept them through evidence and ownership records. Appointment volume alone does not establish health outcomes or appropriateness of care.
LET’S DEFINE THE SCOPE
Review the administrative website scope
We can define technical information, access and appointment-administration work with the institution’s authorized owners.
Discuss administrative scope
Keep social accounts and reviews out of acquisition claims
Within publication support, inspect account information, image accuracy and the institutional approval record together. Domestic health-promotion rules restrict advertising through patient satisfaction and announcements of fees, discounts or promotions. Quoting a former patient’s thanks or reposting another account’s material still belongs in the institution’s publication review rather than being treated as an unrelated activity.
When responding to an existing public comment, avoid confirming that the person is a patient or revealing a session or reason for attendance. Establish an appropriate authorized channel for an administrative complaint instead of extending a public discussion containing private details. Inspect photographs and videos for visible screens, names, appointment lists or people in the room. This guide does not propose a patient-image publication workflow. The institution’s publishing owner should record correction or removal of unsuitable material, while unapproved files remain drafts rather than being scheduled for automatic publication.