Evaluation of YouTube videos for patients' education on periradicular surgery.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jamleh A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8664221 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe Internet is commonly used by patients to acquire health information. To date, no studies have evaluated the quality of information available on YouTube regarding lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM). Our aim was to determine the quality and content of YouTube videos regarding LAM and to compare the information provided with current knowledge and guidelines about the disease.MethodsThe first 200 video hits on YouTube in English for the search term "lymphangioleiomyomatosis" were recorded. All videos suitable for patient education on LAM were included. Video quality was analyzed independently by two investigators utilizing the Health on the Net (HONcode) score, which assesses whether websites provide understandable, accessible, and trustworthy health information; the DISCERN score, which evaluates the quality of information about treatment decisions; and a newly developed LAM-related content score (LRCS) with 31 guideline elements.ResultsThe search identified 64 eligible videos. The "engagement rate" of 0.3 was low, with a median number of views of 408 (range 42-73,943), a median of 4 likes (range 0-2082), and the majority (53%) receiving a low HONcode score (≤ 2) and only 10% of videos achieving a high score (> 5). The median DISCERN score was 28 (range 15-61, maximum possible score 80), indicating poor video quality and reliability. The median LRCS was 8 (range 0-29, maximum possible score 31) and videos frequently failed to provide sources of information.ConclusionsOnline resources could contribute to the limited and often inaccurate information available to patients with LAM, with only a few YouTube videos providing high-quality patient-relevant information.
| S-EPMC9043877 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC8608924 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe aim of this study was to assess the clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) training and education videos on YouTube.MethodsThis study was conducted in English language in descriptive type to evaluate the content, reliability, and quality of Internet videos related to CIC training. The search was performed by using term "clean intermittent catheterization" and "intermittent self catheterization" on YouTube in August 2019. The content of the selected videos was analyzed by 2 independent experts in the field. The DISCERN questionnaire was used to analyze the reliability of the video and the global quality score (GQS) was used for the quality of the video.ResultsWhen the contents of the 64 videos included in the study were examined, it was found that 41 of them contained useful information and 23 of them contained misleading information. DISCERN scores, video coverage scores, and GQS of videos with useful information were found to be statistically higher than those with misleading information (P<0.001). When the sources of the videos were examined, it was seen that 78.05% of the videos containing useful information were published by medical advertisement/for-profit companies (P<0.001). The reliability scores, coverage scores, and GQS of the videos from medical advertisement/for-profit companies were significantly higher than the other sources (P<0.001).ConclusionIn this study, it was seen that the majority of YouTube CIC training videos examined within the scope of the research were published by medical advertisement/for-profit companies and most of these videos contain useful information.
| S-EPMC7538289 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Online medical education has relevance to public health literacy and physician efficacy, yet it requires a certain standard of reliability. While the internet has the potential to be a viable medical education tool, the viewer must be able to discern which information is reliable. OBJECTIVE:Our aim was to perform a literature review to determine and compare the various methods used when analyzing YouTube videos for patient education efficacy, information accuracy, and quality. METHODS:In November 2016, a comprehensive search within PubMed and Embase resulted in 37 included studies. RESULTS:The review revealed that each video evaluation study first established search terms, exclusion criteria, and methods to analyze the videos in a consistent manner. The majority of the evaluators devised a scoring system, but variations were innumerable within each study's methods. CONCLUSIONS:In comparing the 37 studies, we found that overall, common steps were taken to evaluate the content. However, a concrete set of methods did not exist. This is notable since many patients turn to the internet for medical information yet lack the tools to evaluate the advice being given. There was, however, a common aim of discovering what health-related content the public is accessing, and how credible that material is.
| S-EPMC5826977 | 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
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: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).
| S-EPMC8812238 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC9910767 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCannabis oil is being used topically by patients with skin cancer as a homeopathic remedy, and has been promoted and popularized on social media, including YouTube. Although topical cannabinoids, especially tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), may have antitumor effects, results from a sparse number of clinical trials and peer-reviewed studies detailing safety and efficacy are still under investigation.ObjectiveWe sought to assess the accuracy, quality, and reliability of THC oil and skin cancer information available on YouTube.MethodsThe 10 most-viewed videos on THC oil and skin cancer were analyzed with the Global Quality Scale (GQS), DISCERN score, and useful/misleading criteria based on presentation of erroneous and scientifically unproven information. The videos were also inspected for source, length, and audience likes/dislikes. Top comments were additionally examined based on whether they were favorable, unfavorable, or neutral regarding the video content.ResultsAll analyzed videos (10/10, 100%) received a GQS score of 1, corresponding to poor quality of content, and 9/10 (90%) videos received a DISCERN score of 0, indicating poor reliability of information presented. All 10 videos were also found to be misleading and not useful according to established criteria. Top comments were largely either favorable (13/27, 48%) or neutral (13/27, 48%) toward the content of the videos, compared to unfavorable (1/27, 4%).ConclusionsDermatologists should be aware that the spread of inaccurate information on skin cancer treatment currently exists on popular social media platforms and may lead to detrimental consequences for patients interested in pursuing alternative or homeopathic approaches.
| S-EPMC10501512 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWith the increasing popularity of searches for medical information on YouTube, the availability of videos concerning carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is increasing. This study aimed to evaluate the quality and reliability of YouTube videos on CTS.Setting and participantsNo participants were included.Primary and secondary outcome measuresWe searched YouTube on 1 April 2021 using the keywords "carpal tunnel syndrome" and "carpal tunnel release" and evaluated the first 55 retrieved videos. We summarised the video characteristics including Video Power Index (VPI), which was designed to evaluate video popularity based on the number of likes and views. We categorised them based on source and content. Video quality and reliability were evaluated using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, the Global Quality Score (GQS) and the Carpal Tunnel Syndrome-Specific Score (CTS-ss) .ResultsThe mean (range: minimum-maximum) of JAMA scores, GQS and CTS-ss were 2.13 (1-4), 2.69 (1-5), and 5.0 (1-15), respectively. The most common source of video was from allied health workers, and academically sourced videos had the highest JAMA score and GQS. Three scores were significantly correlated with each other. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that a higher JAMA score was associated with a higher likes ratio, and a higher GQS was associated with a longer video running time and greater number of comments. However, a higher VPI was not associated with higher video quality or reliability represented by the three scores.ConclusionsYouTube videos on CTS have low quality and reliability. Video popularity was not significantly correlated with quality or reliability. Our findings suggest that expert groups should provide and promote high-quality video content to YouTube users and patients.
| S-EPMC9014065 | biostudies-literature