Consulting “Dr. YouTube”: an objective evaluation of hypospadias videos on a popular video-sharing website

Salama, Amr K.; Panoch, Janet; Bandali, Elhaam; Carroll, Aaron E.; Wiehe, Sarah E.; Downs, Stephen M.; Cain, Mark P.; Frankel, Richard M.; Chan, Katherine H.

doi:10.1016/j.jpurol.2019.11.011

Cited by 34 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our interclass correlation coefficient indicated good agreement among raters and was higher than a previously reported study of YouTube videos. 28 Our finding that only 20% of videos targeting Black men promoted shared decision making is significantly lower than a similar study looking at videos targeting all men, which found that about 50% promoted shared decision making. 23 Of note, fewer than half of the videos targeting Black men discuss prostate cancer disparities, which is currently recommended as a best practice by the USPSTF and is essential information for Black men deciding about screening.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 83%

Quality of YouTube Videos on Prostate Cancer Screening for Black Men

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Black men are disproportionately impacted by prostate cancer. Guidelines agree that Black men should make informed decisions about whether to engage in prostate cancer screening. YouTube is widely used among Black men and impacts understanding of health conditions.Objectives: Given that misleading online health information might be especially harmful to Black men, the objective of this study was to evaluate the quality of information regarding prostate cancer screening for Black men available on YouTube.Methods: Four viewers watched the top 50 videos using the search term "Prostate Cancer Screening in Black Men." Videos were scored using the previously validated DISCERN quality criteria for consumer health information and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). Results were compared based on video characteristics like presenter perceived demographics and viewer engagement metrics.Results: Inter-rater reliability testing showed consistency for the PEMAT (interclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.69) and DISCERN (ICC= 0.85). Few videos (16%) met the DISCERN quality threshold (54.4/80), and 28% of videos met the PEMAT threshold (10.5/15). Less than half of videos addressed racial disparities in prostate cancer. There was no difference in quality based on perceived race of the presenter (DISCERN P = .06, PEMAT P = .43).Conclusions: The overall quality of videos about prostate cancer screening in Black men is poor, including those with Black presenters. Clinicians should be aware of potential misinformation that Black patients receive from YouTube and the opportunity to improve the quality of available information about prostate cancer screening in Black men.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 83%

Quality of YouTube Videos on Prostate Cancer Screening for Black Men

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3,4 There are a number of academic studies about diverse branches of medicine and a few newly introduced studies about dentistry involving YouTube. [5][6][7][8] The investigations depend on determining reliability and quality of information in dentistry, using a range of appropriate discipline-specific search terms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, video uploading is not subject to quality evaluation or preliminary review, thus validity of the data is a great concern 3,4 . There are a number of academic studies about diverse branches of medicine and a few newly introduced studies about dentistry involving YouTube 5‐8 . The investigations depend on determining reliability and quality of information in dentistry, using a range of appropriate discipline‐specific search terms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of information on YouTube about artificial intelligence in dental radiology

Aydın

Güneç

2020

Journal of Dental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This study was designed to investigate Artificial Intelligence in Dental Radiology (AIDR) videos on YouTube in terms of popularity, content, reliability, and educational quality. Methods: Two researchers systematically searched about AIDR on YouTube on January 27, 2020, by using the terms "artificial intelligence in dental radiology," "machine learning in dental radiology," and "deep learning in dental radiology." The search was performed in English, and 60 videos for each keyword were assessed. Video source, content type, time since upload, duration, and number of views, likes, and dislikes were recorded. Video popularity was reported using Video Power Index (VPI). The accuracy and reliability of the source of information were measured using the adapted DISCERN score. The quality of the videos was measured using JAMAS and modified Global Quality Score (mGQS) and content via Total Concent Evaluation (TCE). Results: There was high interobserver agreement for DISCERN (intraclass cor

show abstract

“…These low scores indicate that the informative level of the RIRS videos available on YouTube was low and did not contain enough information. Similarly, studies evaluating videos related to other urologic diseases stated similar problems [ 13 15 ]. Given that all those who are reaching this information are not health care professionals, these results suggest that viewers can obtain misleading information.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Other studies in the literature have evaluated video platforms for different urologic and nonurologic diseases [ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ]. To the best of our knowledge, however, videos for RIRS on YouTube have not been previously evaluated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

YouTube: A good source for retrograde intrarenal surgery?

Tonyalı

2021

Investig Clin Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To evaluate the quality of videos for retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) on YouTube (Google, LLC) from the perspective of both patients and physicians. Materials and Methods All videos longer than 2 minutes returned by the YouTube search engine in response to the keyword search “retrograde intrarenal surgery” were included in this study. The quality of content was analyzed by using the validated Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Score (JAMAS) and the Global Quality Score (GQS). Two surgeons developed the RIRS Scoring System (RIRSSS) to evaluate the technical quality of the videos. A video power index (VPI) was used to score the popularity of the videos. Results A total of 63 videos with a median of 389 views were included in the present study. Forty-three videos (68.3%) were provided by health care professionals and 53 videos (84.1%) included technical aspects about RIRS. The median (interquartile range) GQS, JAMAS, RIRSSS, and VPI scores were 2 (1–3), 1 (1–2), 2 (1–5), and 0.41 (0.08–1.29), respectively. Videos with audio had significantly higher GQS and RIRSSS scores than did with videos with no audio (p<0.001, p=0.039, respectively). The GQS of videos providing general information about RIRS was higher, whereas RIRSSS scores were higher for videos detailing technical aspects (p=0.027, p=0.038, respectively). Conclusions The quality of YouTube videos containing information about RIRS evaluated in this study was very low. It is necessary for health care organizations to prepare online materials and upload these materials to popular social media platforms to convey accurate information to patients.

show abstract

Consulting “Dr. YouTube”: an objective evaluation of hypospadias videos on a popular video-sharing website

Cited by 34 publications

References 25 publications

Quality of YouTube Videos on Prostate Cancer Screening for Black Men

Quality of YouTube Videos on Prostate Cancer Screening for Black Men

Quality of information on YouTube about artificial intelligence in dental radiology

YouTube: A good source for retrograde intrarenal surgery?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About