Quality of Bladder Cancer Information on YouTube

Loeb, Stacy; Reines, Katy; Abu-Salha, Yousef; French, William W.; Butaney, Mohit; Macaluso, Joseph N.; Steinberg, Gary D.; Walter, Dawn; Byrne, Nataliya; Garza, Dorothy de la; Smith, Angela

doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.014

Cited by 71 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Amongst 61 evaluated sample videos, 22 (36.07%) had unequivocal misinformation, which was in line with previous data ( 7 , 15 , 18 ), indicating that the correctness of online health promotion videos might not have been improved in recent years. Most misinformation was based on obsolete data and content, even at the point of time when the videos were initially posted.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…With the popularization of smartphones and mobile Internet, social media platforms are progressively taking up more and more network traffic as banks of healthcare information for the broad public ( 14 ). However, previous data indicated that two-thirds of the online medical videos were less satisfying in quality, and nearly one-third of them were misleading ( 15 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Strangely, videos from authoritative healthcare providers enjoyed the least popularity. A conclusion might be drawn that video length was not a factor affecting its hotness since long-form videos posted by doctors on YouTube were also the least viewed ( 15 ). Hence, we assumed the poorly designed forms of expression were to blame.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

TikTok as an Information Hodgepodge: Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of Genitourinary Cancers Related Content

Xue

Yang

et al. 2022

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTikTok is the world’s fastest-growing video application, with 1.6 billion users in 2021. More and more patients are searching for information on genitourinary cancers via TikTok. We aim to evaluate the functional quality and reliability of genitourinary cancer-related videos on it and share our thoughts based on the results for better public health promotion.Materials and MethodsWe retrieved 167 videos on bladder, prostate, and kidney cancer from TikTok. Only 61 videos (36.53%) met the inclusion criteria and were eventually regarded as sample videos. Each video’s length and descriptions, hashtags, number of views/likes/comments, forms of expression, and the uploader’s profile were included. Three validated assessment instruments: the Hexagonal Radar Schema, the Health on the Net Code scale, and the DISCERN instrument, were used for evaluating the quality and reliability of the information. All misinformation was counted and categorized. Univariate analysis of variance was performed for analyzing the results. The Post-Hoc least significant difference test was conducted to explore further explanation.ResultsAmongst 61 sample videos, healthcare practitioners contributed the most content (n = 29, 47.54%). However, 22 posts (36.07%) were misinformative, and the most common type was using outdated data. More than half of the videos could provide good (> 1 point) content on the diseases’ symptoms and examinations. However, the definition and outcomes were less addressed (tied at 21%). The HONcode scale and the DISCERN instrument revealed a consistent conclusion that most videos (n = 59, 96.72%) on TikTok were of poor to mediocre quality. Videos published by media agencies were statistically better in terms of reliability and overall score (P = 0.003 and 0.008, respectively). Fifty-three videos (86.89%) had at least two unexplained medical terms. Healthcare professionals tend to use professional terms most (mean = 5.28 words).ConclusionsMost videos on genitourinary cancers on TikTok are of poor to medium quality and reliability. However, videos posted by media agencies enjoyed great public attention and interaction. Medical practitioners could improve the video quality by cooperating with media agencies and avoiding unexplained terminologies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

TikTok as an Information Hodgepodge: Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of Genitourinary Cancers Related Content

Xue

Yang

et al. 2022

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…YouTube, the media and video sharing website with over 1 billion users worldwide, is an important information source that people can gather information about various illnesses and even surgical procedures [ 10 , 11 ]. Recently, several studies have evaluated the quality of YouTube videos on topics such as bladder pain syndrome [ 12 ], bladder cancer [ 13 ], erectile dysfunction [ 14 ], penile prosthesis [ 15 ], male infertility [ 16 ], Peyronie’s disease [ 17 ], and even COVID-19 pandemic [ 18 ] hoping to illuminate YouTube’s effectiveness for patient education. However, there is no study evaluating the quality of YouTube videos regarding DE.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

YouTube is inadequate as an information source on delayed ejaculation

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prevalence of delayed ejaculation in sexually active men is reportedly 3%. Due to its rarity and uncertain definitions, people seek information about delayed ejaculation on the internet. YouTube is one of the largest video platforms preferred global for gathering medical information. We aimed to determine the quality of YouTube videos on delayed ejaculation. YouTube search was performed with the keywords “delayed and retarded ejaculation”, and we recorded the first 400 videos according to relevance. The search results were saved in the playlist, and the first 400 videos were evaluated by two independent urologists. DISCERN and Global Quality Scale (GQS) were used to assess the reliability and quality of videos. Repeated ( n = 17), off-topic ( n = 279), non-English videos ( n = 37), and videos with no audio ( n = 16) were excluded from the study. The remaining 51 videos were evaluated. DISCERN and GQS scores were statistically significantly associated with video durations ( r = 0.329, P = 0.018 and r = 0.349, P = 0.012; respectively). A statistically significant association was also observed between and DISCERN and GQS scores with video power index values ( r = 0.466, P = 0.001 and r = 0.422, P = 0.002; respectively). 62.7% ( n = 32) videos were low quality, 23.5% ( n = 12) were intermediate quality, and 13.7% ( n = 7) were high quality according to the GQS. Most of the YouTube content on delayed ejaculation was of poor quality. Physicians should be aware of this situation, and take the lead in bringing high-quality videos about delayed ejaculation to the community.

show abstract

“…Perhaps even more concerning was the fact that those articles were also 28 times more likely to be shared than factual articles. Regarding the quality of bladder cancer and PCa content on YouTube, studies have shown that many videos contain misinformative and/or poor quality content [129,130]. Moreover, poor quality content had not only more views but also generally high engagement from viewers [130].…”

Section: B2b: Prostate Cancer Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%