Dataset Information

Colonoscopy videos on YouTube: Are they a good source of patient education?

ABSTRACT: 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 ?

SUBMITTER: Radadiya D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7165015 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Colonoscopy videos on YouTube: Are they a good source of patient education?

Radadiya Dhruvil D Gonzalez-Estrada Alexei A Lira-Vera Jorge Emilio JE Lizarrga-Torres Katia K Mahapatra Shayan Sinha SS Murguia-Fuentes Ricardo R Niezen Sebastian S Mohan Kaushik K Reddy Chakradhar C Devani Kalpit K

Endoscopy international open 20200417 5

<b>Background and study aims</b> 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. <b>Methods</b> We performed a YouTube search using the keyword "colonoscopy" yielded 429 videos, of which 255 met the inclusion criteria. Colonoscopy D ...[more]

PMID: 32355876

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionYouTube is the second most popular search website worldwide to access health information online. This study was undertaken to assess the reliability and quality of information about myositis on YouTube and delineate attributes of useful videos using standard metrics.MethodsWe conducted a thorough search on YouTube using 9 search terms related to myositis. The inclusion criteria were content related to myositis, English language and acceptable audio-video quality. Duplicates and advertisements were excluded from the analysis. Videos were classified as useful, not very useful or misleading and patient narratives. Reliability was determined using the mDISCERN criteria, quality using the Global Quality Scale (GQS) and JAMA system, using appropriate cut-offs (mDISCERN > 4, GQS > 4, JAMA > 3).ResultsOut of a total of 900 videos, 453 were included for the analysis. Seventy-four per cent and 2% provided useful and not very useful information respectively, while 24% were patient narratives. Seventy-one per cent were intended specifically for patients while 69% were for healthcare providers and students. Noteworthily, useful and not very useful videos had similar total views though the number of likes and daily viewership were higher for useful videos (p = 0.024, p = 0.046). Nearly half (47%) of useful videos were by professional medical societies/patient support groups (PSGs) while not very useful ones were by nonmedical media (38%). Physician-predicted usefulness was discordant with score-based usefulness (κ = 0.129). However, GQS emerged as a significant (p = 0.008) predictor of video usefulness in multivariate analysis.ConclusionA large majority of English YouTube videos on myositis provide useful information for patients. Physicians could signpost patients to high-quality useful videos as determined by GQS and sources like professional medical societies and PSGs. Key Points •This study highlights the importance of regulating health information posted online, accessed by millions of people, to gauge the quality of information and to identify and curb misinformation. •It also identifies recommendations for the future for uploading such content on the Internet. •The implications lie in our patients being better informed about their disease as they are important stakeholders in the healthcare decision-making process.

Project description:The aim of this study was to evaluate the content of periradicular surgery-related YouTube videos available for patients' education. YouTube search was made for videos related to periradicular surgery using specific terms. After exclusions, 42 videos were selected, viewed and assessed by two independent observers. The videos were assessed in terms of duration, days since upload, country of upload, number of views, likes and dislikes, authorship source, viewing rate and interaction index. To grade the content of videos about periradicular surgery, a usefulness score was created with 10 elements based mainly on the American Association of Endodontists guidelines. Each element was given a score of 0 or 1. SPSS software (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA) was used to analyze data at a 95% confidence level. An inter-evaluator reliability analysis for the scoring system was performed using the Kappa statistic. The videos received an average of 35103.9 views (range: 9-652378) with an average duration of 338.71 seconds (range: 42-2081), respectively. Most videos were provided by individuals (57%). Half of the videos were posted by authors from the United States. The inter-evaluator reliability for usefulness scoring was 94.5%. No video covered the 10 scoring elements completely, presenting very low usefulness scores (mean: 3.2; range: 1-7). The most discussed elements were supporting media (100%) and steps of the procedure (90.5%) followed by indications and contraindications (45.2%) and symptoms (31%). None of the included videos discussed the procedure's cost or prognosis. In terms of usefulness score, no significant difference was detected between different sources of upload (chi-square test, P > 0.05). Information on periradicular surgery in YouTube videos is not comprehensive and patients should not rely on YouTube as the only source of information. Dental professionals should enrich the content of YouTube with good quality videos by providing full and evidence-based information that will positively affect patients' attitudes and satisfaction.

Project description:ObjectiveDue to its video based approach, YouTube has become a widely accessed educational resource for patients and trainees. This systematic review characterised and evaluated the peer reviewed literature investigating YouTube as a source of patient or trainee education in vascular surgery.Data sourcesA comprehensive literature search was conducted using EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Ovid HealthStar from inception until 19 January 2023. All primary studies and conference abstracts evaluating YouTube as a source of vascular surgery education were included.Review methodsVideo educational quality was analysed across several factors, including pathology, video audience, and length.ResultsOverall, 24 studies were identified examining 3 221 videos with 123.1 hours of content and 37.1 million views. Studies primarily examined YouTube videos on diabetic foot care (7/24, 29%), peripheral arterial disease (3/24, 13%), carotid artery stenosis (3/24, 13%), varicose veins (3/24, 13%), and abdominal aortic aneurysm (2/24, 8%). Video educational quality was analysed using standardised assessment tools, author generated scoring systems, or global author reported assessment of quality. Six studies assessed videos for trainee education, while 18 studies evaluated videos for patient education. Among the 20 studies which reported on the overall quality of educational content, 10/20 studies deemed it poor, and 10/20 studies considered it fair, with 53% of studies noting poor educational quality for videos intended for patients and 40% of studies noting poor educational quality in videos intended for trainees. Poor quality videos had more views than fair quality videos (mean 27 348, 95% CI 15 154-39 543 views vs. 11 372, 95% CI 3 115-19 629 views, p = .030).ConclusionThe overall educational quality of YouTube videos for vascular surgery patient and trainee education is suboptimal. There is significant heterogeneity in the quality assessment tools used in their evaluation. A standardised approach to online education with a consistent quality assessment tool is required to better support online patient and trainee education in vascular surgery.

Dataset Information

Colonoscopy videos on YouTube: Are they a good source of patient education?

Publications

Colonoscopy videos on YouTube: Are they a good source of patient education?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets