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: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.
| S-EPMC6658288 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11240016 | 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:BackgroundTikTok was an important channel for consumers to access and adopt health information. But the quality of health content in TikTok remains underinvestigated.ObjectiveOur study aimed to identify upload sources, contents, and feature information of gallstone disease videos on TikTok and further evaluated the factors related to video quality.MethodsWe investigated the first 100 gallstone-related videos on TikTok and analyzed these videos' upload sources, content, and characteristics. The quality of videos was evaluated using quantitative scoring tools such as DISCERN instrument, the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, and Global Quality Scores (GQS). Moreover, the correlation between video quality and video characteristics, including duration, likes, comments, and shares, was further investigated.ResultsAccording to video sources, 81% of the videos were posted by doctors. Furthermore, disease knowledge was the most dominant video content, accounting for 56% of all the videos. The mean DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS scores of all 100 videos are 39.61 (SD 11.36), 2.00 (SD 0.40), and 2.76 (SD 0.95), respectively. According to DISCERN and GQS, gallstone-related videos' quality score on TikTok is not high, mainly at fair (43/100, 43%,) and moderate (46/100, 46%). The total DISCERN scores of doctors were significantly higher than that of individuals and news agencies, surgery techniques were significantly higher than lifestyle and news, and disease knowledge was significantly higher than news, respectively. DISCERN scores and video duration were positively correlated. Negative correlations were found between DISCERN scores and likes and shares of videos. In GQS analysis, no significant differences were found between groups based on different sources or different contents. JAMA was excluded in the video quality and correlation analysis due to a lack of discrimination and inability to evaluate the video quality accurately.ConclusionsAlthough the videos of gallstones on TikTok are mainly provided by doctors and contain disease knowledge, they are of low quality. We found a positive correlation between video duration and video quality. High-quality videos received low attention, and popular videos were of low quality. Medical information on TikTok is currently not rigorous enough to guide patients to make accurate judgments. TikTok was not an appropriate source of knowledge to educate patients due to the low quality and reliability of the information.
| S-EPMC9947761 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionWhilst the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination rollout is well underway, there is a concern in Africa where less than 2% of global vaccinations have occurred. In the absence of herd immunity, health promotion remains essential. YouTube has been widely utilised as a source of medical information in previous outbreaks and pandemics. There are limited data on COVID-19 information on YouTube videos, especially in languages widely spoken in Africa. This study investigated the quality and reliability of such videos.MethodsMedical information related to COVID-19 was analysed in 11 languages (English, isiZulu, isiXhosa, Afrikaans, Nigerian Pidgin, Hausa, Twi, Arabic, Amharic, French, and Swahili). Cohen's Kappa was used to measure inter-rater reliability. A total of 562 videos were analysed. Viewer interaction metrics and video characteristics, source, and content type were collected. Quality was evaluated using the Medical Information Content Index (MICI) scale and reliability was evaluated by the modified DISCERN tool.ResultsKappa coefficient of agreement for all languages was p < 0.01. Informative videos (471/562, 83.8%) accounted for the majority, whilst misleading videos (12/562, 2.13%) were minimal. Independent users (246/562, 43.8%) were the predominant source type. Transmission of information (477/562 videos, 84.9%) was most prevalent, whilst content covering screening or testing was reported in less than a third of all videos. The mean total MICI score was 5.75/5 (SD 4.25) and the mean total DISCERN score was 3.01/5 (SD 1.11).ConclusionYouTube is an invaluable, easily accessible resource for information dissemination during health emergencies. Misleading videos are often a concern; however, our study found a negligible proportion. Whilst most videos were fairly reliable, the quality of videos was poor, especially noting a dearth of information covering screening or testing. Governments, academic institutions, and healthcare workers must harness the capability of digital platforms, such as YouTube to contain the spread of misinformation.
| S-EPMC9876664 | 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:BackgroundIn 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.ObjectiveThe 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.MethodsA 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).ResultsOf 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."ConclusionsMisleading 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:Purpose To evaluate the content and quality of YouTube videos concerning patellar dislocations. Methods “Patellar dislocation” and “kneecap dislocation” were searched on the YouTube library. The Uniform Resource Locator of the first 25 suggested videos was extracted, for a total of 50 videos. The following variables were collected for each video: number of views, duration in minutes, video source/uploader, content type, days since upload, view ratio (views/day), and number of likes. Video source/uploader was categorized as academic, physician, nonphysician, medical source, patient, commercial, and other. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Global Quality Scale (GQS), Patellar Dislocation Specific Score (PDSS), and DISCERN scores were used to assess each video. A series of linear regression models were used to explore relationships between each of these scores and the aforementioned variables. Results The median video length was 4.11 minutes (interquartile range 2.07-6.03, range 0.31-53.56), and the total number of views for all 50 videos was 3,697,587 views. The mean overall JAMA benchmark score ± standard deviation was 2.56 ± 0.64, GQS: 3.54 ± 1.05, total PDSS: 5.76 ± 3.42. Physicians were the most common video source/uploader (42%). Academic sources had the greatest mean JAMA benchmark score (3.20), whereas nonphysician and physician sources had the greatest mean GQS scores (4.09 and 3.95, respectively). Videos uploaded by physicians had the greatest PDSS scores (7.5). Conclusions The overall transparency, reliability, and content quality of YouTube videos on patellar dislocation measured by the JAMA benchmark score and PDSS, respectively, are poor. Additionally, the overall educational and video quality, as assessed by the GQS, was intermediate. Clinical Relevance It is important to understand the quality of information patients receive on YouTube so providers can guide patients to greater-quality sources.
| S-EPMC10123404 | 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