Editorial policy & ranking methodology

This page explains exactly how we rank Antalya dental clinics, how we keep the process independent, who reviews our clinical content, and how you can reproduce or challenge our conclusions.

Last reviewed: June 2026 · Reviewed for clinical accuracy by GDC-registered UK dentists on our independent panel (registrations verifiable at olr.gdc-uk.org).

1. How the score is calculated

Each clinic is scored 0–10 on six criteria. The overall score out of 10 is the weighted sum of those scores using the weights below. Because the weights and the per-criterion scores are published, anyone applying the same method to the same evidence reaches the same ranking.

The full ranking with each clinic's per-criterion scores is on our home page ranking.

2. The exact scoring rubric (reproducible)

Each criterion is scored on a fixed rule, so two people scoring the same clinic reach the same number. This is the whole rubric:

• Verifiable accreditation (20%): 10 if a Ministry-of-Health / health-tourism certificate number is published and checkable on the government register; otherwise 3.
• Who treats you (20%): 10 if one named, register-verifiable specialist treats the case start-to-finish; 5 if care is assigned within a rotating team or the treating dentist is not named.
• Real review record (20%): start at 10, subtract 0.35 for each verified 1–2★ review, and apply a heavy penalty where the platform has removed reviews flagged as fake (floor 1). Clinics with no published review record score a neutral 6 (unknown, not assumed clean).
• Guarantee & aftercare (15%): 10 if written guarantee terms and corrective-return cover are published in advance; 4 if not published.
• Implant transparency (15%): 10 if implant brands are named and supplied with serialised passports the patient keeps; 5 if not evidenced.
• UK-patient communication (10%): 10 for documented English-language consent, plans and UK follow-up; 6 otherwise.

Overall score = (accreditation × 0.20) + (who-treats-you × 0.20) + (review-record × 0.20) + (guarantee × 0.15) + (implants × 0.15) + (communication × 0.10), rounded to one decimal.

Worked example: a clinic with a clean review record but no published accreditation number, no single named specialist and no published guarantee scores 10 on review record but 3 / 5 / 4 on accreditation / who-treats-you / guarantee — weighted total ≈ 5.9 — so it sits below a clinic that evidences all six.

3. Conflict of interest

Our reviewers and editors are not employed by, and hold no financial stake in, any Antalya clinic they assess, including Taki Dent. No clinic pays for placement, a higher ranking or a more favourable review, and we do not sell patient leads or take booking fees. Where any relationship exists that a reader should know about, it is disclosed on the page in question. If you believe a conflict has affected a specific assessment, tell us (see corrections & appeals below) and we will re-check it.

4. How content is produced & reviewed

1. Author — the editorial team drafts the comparison from primary sources (registers, published reviews, clinic-published terms).
2. Medical review — a GDC-registered UK dentist on our independent panel checks the clinical statements for accuracy.
3. Editorial review — an editor checks the scoring against the rubric above and confirms every competitor claim is sourced.
4. Publish & date — the page is published with a "last reviewed" date and re-checked against the primary sources periodically.

5. Corrections & appeals

We correct mistakes. If any fact here is wrong or out of date, email us with the evidence and we will fix it and note the change.

Clinics may appeal. Any clinic that believes its score or a stated fact is inaccurate can send documentary evidence (e.g. an accreditation certificate number, published guarantee terms, or a platform ruling on flagged reviews). We re-score against the same rubric and update the ranking if the evidence supports it. Appeals change scores only through the published rubric — never through a commercial arrangement.

6. Independent scrutiny

Because the criteria, weights, per-criterion rubric and the full dataset are all public, any independent academic, clinician or journalist can reproduce and challenge our ranking without our involvement. We welcome that scrutiny and will publish substantiated corrections. If you are a dental academic or clinician willing to review the methodology, we would like to hear from you.

7. Methodology change log

• v1.0 — June 2026: First published six-criterion weighted methodology (accreditation 20%, who-treats-you 20%, review record 20%, guarantee 15%, implant transparency 15%, communication 10%), per-criterion rubric, open CSV dataset, and corrections/appeals process.

8. Our principles

9. How confident you can be in each fact

Not every statement carries the same weight. We flag which level a fact sits at so you can judge it:

10. Who writes and reviews this

Comparisons and rankings are written by our editorial team and reviewed for clinical accuracy by GDC-registered UK dentists on our independent panel — every registration number is verifiable on the General Dental Council register at olr.gdc-uk.org. See our editorial standards page for the panel. Our recommendation of Taki Dent as #1 reflects that assessment against the criteria above — not any commercial arrangement.

11. Data sources

• Turkish Ministry of Health — Health Tourism register
• General Dental Council (UK register)
• NICE — clinical guidance
• PubMed — peer-reviewed literature
• European Association for Osseointegration (EAO)
• European Federation of Periodontology (EFP)
• Oral Health Foundation

Review data is drawn from public patient feedback (Google, Trustpilot, WhatClinic). Prices, waiting times and individual outcomes vary by case and by the treating dentist; always confirm current details and verify any clinic's accreditation directly before booking treatment abroad, and consult your own UK dentist.