A cross-sectional study analyzing the quality of YouTube videos as a source of information for COVID-19 intubation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
There 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.Methods
The 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.Results
The 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).Conclusions
The quality of YouTube videos for COVID-19 intubation is substandard. Poor quality videos may provide inaccurate knowledge to viewers and potentially cause harm.
SUBMITTER: Arslan B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8590979 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
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.
| S-EPMC8274673 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The 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. OBJECTIVE:The 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. METHODS:YouTube 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. RESULTS:A 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. CONCLUSIONS:YouTube 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.
| S-EPMC6658288 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC4707975 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn recent years, YouTube has become a recognized source of medical information for health care consumers. Although YouTube has advantages in this context, there are potential dangers as videos may contain nonscientific, misleading, or even harmful information.ObjectiveAs little is known about YouTube as a source of information on atopic dermatitis (AD), we investigated the content-related quality of AD videos and their perception among YouTube users.MethodsThe quality of the 100 most viewed AD videos was assessed by using the Global Quality Scale (GQS) and the DISCERN instrument. Videos were classified as "useful," "misleading," and "potentially harmful," and the correlations of viewers' ratings (likes) with the GQS and DISCERN scores were assessed.ResultsAmong the 100 videos, 68.0% (68/100) and 62.0% (62/100) were of poor and very poor scientific quality, respectively. Additionally, 32.0% (32/100) of the videos were classified as useful, 48.0% (48/100) were classified as misleading, and 34.0% (34/100) were classified as potentially harmful. Viewers' ratings did not correlate with the GQS and DISCERN scores. Overall, 50.0% (50/100) of the videos were posted by private individuals and promoters of complementary/alternative treatments, 42.0% (42/100) by therapeutical advertisers, and only 8.0% (8/100) by nonprofit organizations/universities.ConclusionsOur study demonstrated that two-thirds of the videos analyzed were below acceptable medical quality standards and that many videos were disseminating misleading or even dangerous content. Subjective and anecdotal content was overrepresented, and viewers did not appear to be able to distinguish between high- and low-quality videos. Health promotion strategies by professional medical organizations are needed to improve their presence and visibility on YouTube.
| S-EPMC7210495 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:In South Korea, the number of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases has declined rapidly and much sooner than in other countries. South Korea is one of the most digitalized countries in the world, and YouTube may have served as a rapid delivery mechanism for increasing public awareness of COVID-19. Thus, the platform may have helped the South Korean public fight the spread of the disease. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study is to compare the reliability, overall quality, title-content consistency, and content coverage of Korean-language YouTube videos on COVID-19, which have been uploaded by different sources. METHODS:A total of 200 of the most viewed YouTube videos from January 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020, were screened, searching in Korean for the terms "Coronavirus," "COVID," "Corona," "Wuhan virus," and "Wuhan pneumonia." Non-Korean videos and videos that were duplicated, irrelevant, or livestreamed were excluded. Source and video metrics were collected. The videos were scored based on the following criteria: modified DISCERN index, Journal of the American Medical Association Score (JAMAS) benchmark criteria, global quality score (GQS), title-content consistency index (TCCI), and medical information and content index (MICI). RESULTS:Of the 105 total videos, 37.14% (39/105) contained misleading information; independent user-generated videos showed the highest proportion of misleading information at 68.09% (32/47), while all of the government-generated videos were useful. Government agency-generated videos achieved the highest median score of DISCERN (5.0, IQR 5.0-5.0), JAMAS (4.0, IQR 4.0-4.0), GQS (4.0, IQR 3.0-4.5), and TCCI (5.0, IQR 5.0-5.0), while independent user-generated videos achieved the lowest median score of DISCERN (2.0, IQR 1.0-3.0), JAMAS (2.0, IQR 1.5-2.0), GQS (2.0, IQR 1.5-2.0), and TCCI (3.0, IQR 3.0-4.0). However, the total MICI was not significantly different among sources. "Transmission and precautionary measures" were the most commonly covered content by government agencies, news agencies, and independent users. In contrast, the most mentioned content by news agencies was "prevalence," followed by "transmission and precautionary measures." CONCLUSIONS:Misleading videos had more likes, fewer comments, and longer running times than useful videos. Korean-language YouTube videos on COVID-19 uploaded by different sources varied significantly in terms of reliability, overall quality, and title-content consistency, but the content coverage was not significantly different. Government-generated videos had higher reliability, overall quality, and title-content consistency than independent user-generated videos.
| S-EPMC7425748 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although ecotourism is expected to be compatible with conservation, it often imposes negative effects on wildlife. The ecotourism of endangered mountain gorillas has attracted many tourists and functioned as a key component of their conservation. There might be expectations on the part of tourists to observe or interact with gorillas in close proximity and such expectations may have been engendered by the contents of social media in this Information Age. However, the risk of disease transmission between humans and gorillas is a large concern and it is important to maintain a certain distance while observing gorillas to minimize risk. We conducted a content analysis and described the general characteristics of 282 YouTube videos related to mountain gorilla tourism. Humans and gorillas were observed simultaneously in 70% of the videos, and physical contact or close proximity within arm's reach were identified in 40%. To explore the factors affecting the number of views and likes that these videos received, we ran generalized linear mixed models and performed AIC model selection with 206 videos in which humans and gorillas were observed simultaneously. Videos obtained more views and likes when the thumbnail photos included humans and gorillas together, while videos with thumbnail photos of only gorillas did not obtain more views and likes compared with those that included no gorillas. Moreover, videos obtained more views and likes in cases where physical contact or close proximity within arm's reach with gorillas were clearly observed, compared with those that did not clearly include close human-gorilla interaction. These results suggest that human-gorilla interaction and proximity with gorillas attract more public attention than gorillas shown by themselves. Our study highlights the importance of further investigation on the direct link between such contents that violate tourism regulations and the conflicting situation.
| S-EPMC7241773 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The current 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak is rapidly evolving. YouTube has been recognized as a popular source of information in previous disease outbreaks. We analyzed the content on YouTube about n-CoV in English and Mandarin languages. METHODS:YouTube was searched using the terms '2019 novel coronavirus', 'Wuhan virus' and '' (Mandarin for Wuhan virus) on 1st and 2nd February 2020. First 50 videos in each group were analyzed. Videos in other languages, duplicate videos, those without an audio and duration >15 min were excluded .72 videos in English and 42 in Mandarin were reviewed. 2 reviewers classified the videos as useful, misleading or news based on pre specified criterion. Inter-observer agreement was evaluated with kappa coefficient. Modified DISCERN index for reliability and medical information and content index (MICI) score were used for content analysis. RESULTS:These videos attracted cumulative 21,288,856 views. 67% of English and 50% Mandarin videos had useful information. The viewership of misleading Mandarin videos was higher than the useful ones. WHO accounted for only 4% of useful videos. Mean DISCERN score for reliability was 3.12/5 and 3.25/5 for English and Mandarin videos respectively. Mean cumulative MICI score of useful videos was low (6.71/25 for English and 6.28/25 for Mandarin). CONCLUSIONS:YouTube viewership during 2019 n-CoV outbreak is higher than previous outbreaks. The medical content of videos is suboptimal International health agencies are underrepresented. Given its popularity, YouTube should be considered as important platform for information dissemination.
| S-EPMC7118680 | biostudies-literature
Project description:YouTube is the second most popular website in the world and is increasingly being used as a platform for disseminating health information. Our aim was to evaluate the content-quality and audience engagement of YouTube videos pertaining to the SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome)-CoV-2 virus which causes the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), during the early phase of the pandemic. We chose the first 30 videos for seven different search phrases: "2019 nCoV," "SARS CoV-2," "COVID-19 virus," "coronavirus treatment," "coronavirus explained," "what is the coronavirus" and "coronavirus information." Video contents were evaluated by two independent medical students with more than 5 years of experience using the DISCERN instrument. Qualitative data, quantitative data and upload source for each video was noted for a quality and audience engagement analysis. Out of the total 210 videos, 137 met our inclusion criteria and were evaluated. The mean DISCERN score was 31.33 out of 75 possible points, which indicates that the quality of YouTube videos on COVID-19 is currently poor. There was excellent reliability between the two raters (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.96). 55% of the videos discussed prevention, 49% discussed symptoms and 46% discussed the spread of the virus. Most of the videos were uploaded by news channels (50%) and education channels (40%). The quality of YouTube videos on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 is poor, however, we have listed the top-quality videos in our article as they may be effective tools for patient education during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC7323134 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC9030909 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC7165015 | biostudies-literature