Project description:BackgroundInflammatory back pain is a chronic condition with localized pain, particularly in the axial spine and sacroiliac joints, that is associated with morning stiffness and improves with exercise. YouTube is the second most frequently used social media platform for accessing health information. This study sought to investigate the quality and reliability of YouTube videos on inflammatory back pain (IBP).MethodsThe study design was planned as cross-sectional. A search was conducted using the term "inflammatory back pain," and the first 100 videos that met the inclusion criteria were selected on October 19, 2023. The data of the videos selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria in the study settings were examined. Videos with English language, with audiovisual content , had a duration >30 s, non-duplicated and primary content related to IBP were included in the study. A number of video parameters such as the number of likes, number of views, duration, and content categories were assessed. The videos were assessed for reliability using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmark criteria and the DISCERN tool. Quality was assessed using the Global Quality Score (GQS). Continuous variables were checked for normality of distribution using Shapiro-Wilk test and Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test were used to analyze the continuous data depending on the number of groups. Categorical data were analyzed using Pearson's chi-square test.ResultsReliability assessment based on JAMA scores showed 21% of the videos to have high reliability. Quality assessment based on GQS results showed 19% of the videos to have high quality. JAMA, DISCERN, and GQS scores differed significantly by source of video (p < 0.001, < 0.001, and = 0.002, respectively). Video duration had a moderate positive correlation with scores from the GQS (r = 0.418, p < 0.001), JAMA (r = 0.484, p < 0.001), and modified DISCERN (r = 0.418, p < 0.001).ConclusionThe results of the present study showed that YouTube offers videos of low reliability and low quality on inflammatory back pain. Health authorities have a responsibility to protect public health and should take proactive steps regarding health information shared on social media platforms.
Project description:Background and study aims Colonoscopy is an effective tool to prevent colorectal cancer. Social media has emerged as a source of medical information for patients.YouTube (a video sharing website) is the most popular video informative source. Therefore, we aimed to assess the educational quality of colonoscopy videos available on YouTube. Methods We performed a YouTube search using the keyword "colonoscopy" yielded 429 videos, of which 255 met the inclusion criteria. Colonoscopy Data Quality Score (C-DQS) was created to rate the quality of the videos (-10 to +40 points) based on a colonoscopy education video available on the Ameican Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) website. Each video was scored by six blinded reviewers independently using C-DQS. The Global Quality Score (GQS) was used for score validation. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the similarity of the scores among reviewers. Results Professional societies had the highest number of videos (44.3 %). Videos from professional societies (6.94) and media (6.87) had significantly higher mean C-DQS compared to those from alternative medicine providers (1.19), companies (1.16), and patients (2.60) ( P < 0.05). Mean C-DQS score of videos from healthcare providers (4.40) was not statistically different than other sources. There was a high degree of agreement among reviewers for the videos from all sources (ICC = 0.934; P < 0.001). Discussion YouTube videos are a poor source of information on colonoscopy. Professional societies and media are better sources of quality information for patient education on colonoscopy. The medical community may need to engage actively in enriching the quality of educational material available on YouTube.
Project description:BackgroundPeople with gestational diabetes have enhanced learning requirements during pregnancy, and management of their disease often requires the translation of health information into new health behavior changes. Seeking information from the internet to augment learning from health professionals is becoming more common during pregnancy. YouTube is a popular free and accessible web-based resource, which may be particularly useful for individuals with low health literacy or other barriers to receiving high-quality health care; however, the quality and content of YouTube videos varies, and little is known about those covering gestational diabetes.ObjectiveWe aimed to systematically evaluate the quality, content, and reliability of YouTube videos about gestational diabetes.MethodsA systematic search of YouTube videos was conducted over the course of 1 week in April 2020 using the following keywords: "gestational diabetes," "gestational diabetes management," "gestational diabetes treatment," and "pregnancy and diabetes." The search results were displayed by relevance, replicating a default YouTube search attempt. The first 60 results from each keyword were reviewed (n=240). Exclusion criteria were videos unrelated to gestational diabetes, videos not in English, and those for which the full video was not available at the time of review. For each unique video, a gestational diabetes content score was used to rate video comprehensiveness and accuracy, and the DISCERN instrument, a validated metric to assess consumer health information, was used to evaluate the reliability of information presented. Videos were further categorized by quality: videos with DISCERN scores lower than 3 (out of 5) or a content score less than 4 (out of 7) were categorized as low quality, and all others were designated high quality. We performed descriptive analysis and compared video characteristics by source and quality rating.ResultsFor 115 unique videos, the mean content score (out of 7) was 3.5 (SD 2.0) , and the mean DISCERN score (out of 5) was 2.7 (SD 0.7), representing low to moderate information comprehensiveness and reliability respectively. Video sources were categorized as personal vlog (12/115, 10.4%), web-based education (37/115, 32.2%), medical (52/115, 45.2%), business or company (13/115, 11.3%), and media clip (1/115, 0.9%). DISCERN and content scores trended higher among medical and web-based education videos. The majority of videos (n=88) were categorized as low quality, while 27 videos were categorized as high quality. Video duration was longer for high-quality videos (P<.001); high- and low-quality videos otherwise had similar views and viewer interaction numbers.ConclusionsAlthough high-quality videos about gestational diabetes exist, reliability, accuracy, and comprehensiveness were low overall, and higher quality was not associated with increased viewer interaction. It is important to acknowledge the limitations of this platform and to assist patients in accessing high quality content and differentiating the quality of information sources.
Project description:BackgroundWe evaluated the utility and quality of surgical videos posted on the main retinal YouTube channels by surgeons at different career stages and assessed how well the steps of the vitrectomy videos conformed to the parameters in the Casey Eye Institute Vitrectomy Indices Tool for Skills assessment (CEIVITS) scale.MethodsForty-five videos were included from nine retinal YouTube channels posted from 2011 to 2021. For each surgeon, 10 videos were randomized and the utility, quality, and educational content were assessed. For each video, the surgeons also assessed how the validated CEIVITS items were presented in the videos. The surgeons were divided based on years of experience: fellows (0-3 years), young surgeons (4-10 years), and senior surgeons (more than 10 years).ResultsThe video image quality was rated as good in 63.52% of evaluations, moderate in 30.37%, and poor in 6.11%. The quality assessment of the videos among the groups did not differ. The fellows rated the use of the videos as educational tools higher (3.99) than the young (3.87) and senior surgeons (3.47) (p < 0.0002, Kruskal-Wallis test); 34.76% of the fellows reported learning something new from the videos compared with 19.17% of the senior surgeons (p < 0.05). The CEIVITS scale item that was seen more frequently was related to core vitrectomies (72.29%) and the least represented was about checking infusion lines (80.17%).ConclusionsVitreoretinal surgical videos are useful educational tools during all stages of surgeons' careers, and the evaluation of the quality of the images did not differ significantly among the groups, however, surgeons with expertise shorter than 10 years report significantly greater use of videos than experienced surgeons. Videos posted to the public domain on different social media, most often YouTube, are widespread and unregulated for providing complimentary surgical education. Retinal societies should formulate guidelines and improve the educational value of the surgical videos posted on the Internet. Trial Registration The Federal University of São Paulo institution's Research Ethics Committee reviewed and approved this study protocol (Approval Number, 4.726.589).
Project description:IntroductionThere are many possible sources of medical information; however, the quality of the information varies. Poor quality or inaccurate resources may be harmful if they are trusted by providers. This study aimed to analyze the quality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related intubation videos on YouTube.MethodsThe term "COVID-19 intubation" was searched on YouTube. The top 100 videos retrieved were sorted by relevance and 37 videos were included. The video demographics were recorded. The quality of the videos was analyzed using an 18-point checklist, which was designed for evaluating COVID-19 intubation. Videos were also evaluated using general video quality scores and the modified Journal of the American Medical Association score.ResultsThe educational quality was graded as good for eight (21.6%) videos, moderate for 13 (35.1%) videos, and poor for 16 (43.2%) videos. The median safe COVID-19 intubation score (SCIS) was 11 (IQR = 5-13). The SCISs indicated that videos prepared in an intensive care unit were higher in quality than videos from other sources (p < 0.05). The length of the video was predictive of quality (area under the curve = 0.802, 95% CI = 0.658-0.945, p = 0.10).ConclusionsThe quality of YouTube videos for COVID-19 intubation is substandard. Poor quality videos may provide inaccurate knowledge to viewers and potentially cause harm.
Project description:BackgroundYouTube has become an increasingly popular educational tool and an important source of healthcare information. We investigated the reliability and quality of the information in Korean-language YouTube videos about gout.MethodsWe performed a comprehensive electronic search on April 2, 2021, using the following keywords-"gout," "acute gout," "gouty arthritis," "gout treatment," and "gout attack"-and identified 140 videos in the Korean language. Two rheumatologists then categorized the videos into three groups: "useful," "misleading," and "personal experience." Reliability was determined using a five-item questionnaire modified from the DISCERN validation tool, and overall quality scores were based on the Global Quality Scale (GQS).ResultsAmong the 140 videos identified, 105 (75.0%), 29 (20.7%), and 6 (4.3%) were categorized as "useful," "misleading," and "personal experience," respectively. Most videos in the "useful" group were created by rheumatologists (70.5%). The mean DISCERN and GQS scores in the "useful" group (3.3 ± 1.0 and 3.8 ± 0.7) were higher than those in the "misleading" (0.9 ± 1.0 and 1.9 ± 0.6) and "personal experience" groups (0.8 ± 1.2 and 2.0 ± 0.8) (P < 0.001 for both the DISCERN and GQS tools).ConclusionApproximately 75% of YouTube videos that contain educational material regarding gout were useful; however, we observed some inaccuracies in the medical information provided. Healthcare professionals should closely monitor media content and actively participate in the development of videos that provide accurate medical information.
Project description:BackgroundWhen making decisions about medication use in pregnancy, women consult many information sources, including the Internet. The aim of this study was to assess the content of publicly accessible YouTube videos that discuss medication use in pregnancy.MethodsUsing 2023 distinct combinations of search terms related to medications and pregnancy, we extracted metadata from YouTube videos using a YouTube video Application Programming Interface. Relevant videos were defined as those with a medication search term and a pregnancy-related search term in either the video title or description. We viewed relevant videos and abstracted content from each video into a database. We documented whether videos implied each medication to be "safe" or "unsafe" in pregnancy and compared that assessment with the medication's Teratogen Information System (TERIS) rating.ResultsAfter viewing 651 videos, 314 videos with information about medication use in pregnancy were available for the final analyses. The majority of videos were from law firms (67%), television segments (10%), or physicians (8%). Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) were the most common medication class named (225 videos, 72%), and 88% of videos about SSRIs indicated that they were unsafe for use in pregnancy. However, the TERIS ratings for medication products in this class range from "unlikely" to "minimal" teratogenic risk.ConclusionFor the majority of medications, current YouTube video content does not adequately reflect what is known about the safety of their use in pregnancy and should be interpreted cautiously. However, YouTube could serve as a platform for communicating evidence-based medication safety information.
Project description:BackgroundRecent emergency authorization and rollout of COVID-19 vaccines by regulatory bodies has generated global attention. As the most popular video-sharing platform globally, YouTube is a potent medium for the dissemination of key public health information. Understanding the nature of available content regarding COVID-19 vaccination on this widely used platform is of substantial public health interest.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the reliability and quality of information on COVID-19 vaccination in YouTube videos.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, the phrases "coronavirus vaccine" and "COVID-19 vaccine" were searched on the UK version of YouTube on December 10, 2020. The 200 most viewed videos of each search were extracted and screened for relevance and English language. Video content and characteristics were extracted and independently rated against Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct and DISCERN quality criteria for consumer health information by 2 authors.ResultsForty-eight videos, with a combined total view count of 30,100,561, were included in the analysis. Topics addressed comprised the following: vaccine science (n=18, 58%), vaccine trials (n=28, 58%), side effects (n=23, 48%), efficacy (n=17, 35%), and manufacturing (n=8, 17%). Ten (21%) videos encouraged continued public health measures. Only 2 (4.2%) videos made nonfactual claims. The content of 47 (98%) videos was scored to have low (n=27, 56%) or moderate (n=20, 42%) adherence to Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct principles. Median overall DISCERN score per channel type ranged from 40.3 (IQR 34.8-47.0) to 64.3 (IQR 58.5-66.3). Educational channels produced by both medical and nonmedical professionals achieved significantly higher DISCERN scores than those of other categories. The highest median DISCERN scores were achieved by educational videos produced by medical professionals (64.3, IQR 58.5-66.3) and the lowest median scores by independent users (18, IQR 18-20).ConclusionsThe overall quality and reliability of information on COVID-19 vaccines on YouTube remains poor. Videos produced by educational channels, especially by medical professionals, were higher in quality and reliability than those produced by other sources, including health-related organizations. Collaboration between health-related organizations and established medical and educational YouTube content producers provides an opportunity for the dissemination of high-quality information on COVID-19 vaccination. Such collaboration holds potential as a rapidly implementable public health intervention aiming to engage a wide audience and increase public vaccination awareness and knowledge.
Project description:BackgroundThe use of the internet as a source of information has grown exponentially in the last decade. YouTube is currently the second most visited website and a major Web-based educational resource for medical students.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the quality, accuracy, and attractiveness of the information acquired from YouTube videos about 2 central concepts in immunology.MethodsYouTube videos posted before August 27, 2018 were searched using selected keywords related to either antigen presentation or immunoglobulin gene rearrangement. Video characteristics were recorded, and the Video Power Index (VPI) was calculated. Videos were assessed using 5 validated scoring systems: understandability and attractiveness, reliability, content and comprehensiveness, global quality score (GQS), and a subjective score. Videos were categorized by educational usefulness and by source.ResultsA total of 82 videos about antigen presentation and 70 about immunoglobulin gene rearrangement were analyzed. Videos had a mean understandability and attractiveness score of 6.57/8 and 5.84/8, content and comprehensiveness score of 9.84/20 and 5.84/20, reliability score of 1.65/4 and 1.53/4, GQS of 3.38/5 and 2.76/5, and subjective score of 2.00/3 and 2.00/3, respectively. The organized channels group tended to have the highest VPI and GQS.ConclusionsYouTube can provide medical students with some useful information about immunology, although content wise it cannot substitute textbooks and academic courses. Students and teachers should be aware of the educational quality of available videos if they intend to use them in the context of blended learning.
Project description:BackgroundTo prepare for surgery, surgeons often recur to surgical videos, with YouTube being reported as the preferred source. This study aimed to compare the evaluation of three surgical trainees and three senior surgeons of the 25 most viewed laparoscopic appendectomy videos listed on YouTube. Additionally, we assessed the video conformity to the published guidelines on how to report laparoscopic surgery videos (LAP-VEGaS).MethodsBased on the number of visualization, the 25 most viewed videos on laparoscopic appendectomy uploaded on YouTube between 2010 and 2018 were selected. Videos were evaluated on the surgical technical performance (GOALS score), critical view of safety (CVS), and overall video quality and utility.ResultsVideo image quality was poor for nine (36%) videos, good for nine (36%), and in high definition for seven (28%). Educational content (e.g., audio or written commentary) was rarely present. With the exception of the overall level of difficulty, poor consistency was observed for the GOALS domains between senior surgeons and trainees. Fifteen videos (60%) demonstrated a satisfactory CVS score (≥ 5). Concerning the overall video quality, agreement among senior surgeons was higher (Cronbach's alpha 0.897) than among trainees (Cronbach's alpha 0.731). The mean overall videos utility (Likert scale, 1 to 5) was 1.92 (SD 0.88) for senior examiners, and 3.24 (SD 1.02) for trainee examiners. The conformity to the LAP-VEGaS guidelines was weak, with a median value of 8.1% (range 5.4-18.9%).ConclusionLaparoscopic videos represent a useful and appropriate educational tool but they are not sufficiently reviewed to obtained standard quality. A global effort should be made to improve the educational value of the uploaded surgical videos, starting from the application of the nowadays-available LAP-VEGaS guidelines.