Evaluation of YouTube as an information source for denture care

Yağci, Filiz

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.06.045

Cited by 19 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This might be because of using 'denture cleaning' as the search term in the previous study which might have resulted in product advertisement videos being retrieved from the search. All three commercial videos received a low rating based on our scoring criteria in comparison to videos uploaded by other sources which is contrary to Yagci et al's study which reported that videos uploaded by commercial companies received the largest rating of good content 23.…”

contrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the affiliation of videos, the majority of videos were uploaded by CNAs (53.3%), this is in concordance with a previous study that found that videos that focused on educating nurses to care for older people patients were more in number in comparison to videos uploaded by other sources. 23 These videos had lower usefulness scores and mDISCERN in comparison to videos uploaded by other sources. This is also in accordance with the previous study which found that videos uploaded for the purpose of educating nurses on denture care generally received poor usefulness scores.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…study. 23 Other studies evaluating YouTube™ videos on other topics related to oral health and dentistry such as halitosis, paediatric dental trauma and periradicular surgery reported 55.2%, 47.2% and 61.9%, respectively, of reviewed videos as poor. 10,24,25 The higher number of videos receiving a low usefulness score in our study can be explained by the comprehensive scoring criteria used for the content score assessment, while most videos (97.5%) had some information regarding how to clean dentures and many other aspects of denture care were not mentioned in the majority of the videos and therefore most videos received low content scores.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…This is also in accordance with the previous study which found that videos uploaded for the purpose of educating nurses on denture care generally received poor usefulness scores. 23 Only 3 (2.5%) videos were uploaded by commercial dental product companies such as Colgate™, TePe™ and Glaxo Smith Kline™ in our study. A previous review reported 42 (38.5%) of their videos on This difference may be explained by the more extensive criteria we used to determine the content score for videos.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Assessment of usefulness and reliability of YouTube™ videos on denture care

Aurlene,

Shaik,

Dickson‐Swift

et al. 2023

Int J Dental Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe world's population is in a demographic transition with a rising ageing population. Tooth loss is frequent among older people resulting in the replacement of natural teeth using complete or partial dentures. YouTube™ is the second most popular website in the world and is being increasingly used to access health care information. The aim of this study is to evaluate the usefulness and reliability of the information in YouTube™ videos regarding denture care.MethodsThe YouTube™ website was used to systematically search for videos using the keyword ‘denture care’. Videos meeting the eligibility criteria were assessed separately by two independent researchers. The usefulness of the videos was assessed using the Global Quality Assessment Scale and a customized usefulness scoring scheme. Based on these scores, the usefulness of the videos was categorized as low, medium and high. A modified DISCERN tool (mDISCERN) was used for assessing reliability with scores ranging from 0 to 5. Other video characteristics like source/ownership of the videos, duration, views, likes, dislikes, number of days posted, like ratio, view ratio, interaction index and Video Power Index were also obtained. Statistical analysis was carried out using the Kruskal‐Wallis test, Spearman correlation test and multiple linear regression analysis.ResultsA total of 120 videos were included. Based on the usefulness score, the usefulness of 65.8% of videos were classified as low, 32.5% were medium and 1.6% had high usefulness. The mDISCERN score for 74.2% of videos was 2 or below 2 indicating that the majority of videos had low reliability. Video characteristics did not differ significantly according to the usefulness of videos. Videos uploaded by dentists or dental hygienists had significantly higher usefulness scores (p < 0.001) in comparison to videos uploaded by other sources. However, reliability scores did not differ based on the sources of the videos. Video reliability was found to have a significant (B = 2.08, p < 0.001) positive association with video usefulness.ConclusionYouTube™ cannot be recommended as the only source of information for denture care as most videos received low usefulness and reliability ratings in our study. Dentists and dental health professionals could take an active part in enhancing denture care‐related content on YouTube™ and enable patients to have adequate and reliable knowledge of denture hygiene practices.

show abstract

contrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Assessment of usefulness and reliability of YouTube™ videos on denture care

Aurlene,

Shaik,

Dickson‐Swift

et al. 2023

Int J Dental Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the completeness scores of the video content by upload source were not significantly different (p > 0.05). This was inconsistent with the results of previous studies, in which videos by professionals were more beneficial [25,26]. Since videos by professionals focus on the procedure itself rather than basic knowledge, it is believed that the completeness of videos by professionals is not greater.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 78%

Assessment of reliability and information quality of YouTube videos about root canal treatment after 2016

Jung

Seo

2022

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study aimed to assess and update the content, reliability, and information quality of content related to root canal treatment (RCTx) on YouTube and evaluate the correlation between each evaluation index. Methods YouTube was searched using two terms related to RCTx (“root canal and endodontic treatment”). A total of 240 videos (120 for each search term) were screened. Exclusion criteria were as follows: no sound or visuals, non-English, irrelevant to the search term, longer than 15 min, duplicate, or old (uploaded before 2016). After exclusion, 50 videos of “root canal treatment” and 45 videos of “endodontic treatment” were analyzed. Video length, total number of views, likes, dislikes, comments, and days since upload were recorded using descriptive video data. Viewers’ interaction, reliability and information quality of the video, and quality of video content were measured using nondescriptive video data. The interaction index and video power index were used for viewer interactions, and the modified DISCERN index, JAMA criteria, and Global Quality Score were used to assess the reliability and information quality of the video. The quality of the video content was measured using the completeness score. Results The videos of the “root canal treatment” group had a significantly higher completeness score for the etiology and symptoms (p < 0.05), and videos of the “endodontic treatment” group showed a higher interaction index, completeness score for the procedure (p < 0.05). Videos for dentists had significantly higher completeness scores for the procedure, while videos for laypersons had higher completeness scores for etiology, anatomy, symptoms, and prognosis (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the total completeness score and the interaction index of the videos for laypersons were significantly higher (p < 0.05). The videos uploaded by the university had a significantly higher modified DISCERN index (p = 0.044), and the JAMA score was significantly higher in the commercial group (p = 0.001). Conclusions Although the accuracy of videos related to RCTx was higher in videos by universities and professionals, the total completeness of YouTube videos was low regardless of the video source. Therefore, professionals should be responsible for providing more accurate and reliable videos.

show abstract

Temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis videos on YouTube: Are they a good source of information?

Çanakçı

2022

Journal of Stomatology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of YouTube as an information source for denture care

Cited by 19 publications

References 23 publications

Assessment of usefulness and reliability of YouTube™ videos on denture care

Assessment of usefulness and reliability of YouTube™ videos on denture care

Assessment of reliability and information quality of YouTube videos about root canal treatment after 2016

Temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis videos on YouTube: Are they a good source of information?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About