Quality of Information in YouTube Videos on Erectile Dysfunction

Fode, Mikkel; Nolsøe, Alexander B; Jacobsen, Frederik M.; Russo, Giorgio Ivan; Østergren, Peter; Jensen, Christian; Albersen, Maarten; Capogrosso, Paolo; Sønksen, Jens

doi:10.1016/j.esxm.2020.05.007

Cited by 68 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar to our study, Fode et al examined 100 YouTube videos about ED and reported that only 21 of these videos were uploaded directly by physicians. The authors reported that the quality of the examined videos was very good in two, good in 16, average in 21, poor in 35, and very poor in 18 [12]. Given that many previously conducted studies have reported health-related YouTube videos to be of low quality, our findings are not surprising [18][19][20].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 50%

“…Recently, Fode et al evaluated YouTube content pertaining to ED. The authors assessed the videos using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) and the Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information (DISCERN) scales and reported that these videos were generally low quality and misleading [12]. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the most viewed videos on the treatment of ED in terms of content, accuracy, reliability, and quality.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An evaluation of YouTube video content regarding erectile dysfunction

2021

JOMH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: YouTubeTM is one of the most popular social media platforms on the internet, and patients with chronic disease frequently use it to seek treatment options. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the quality of YouTube videos about erectile dysfunction. Materials & methods: The terms "erectile dysfunction treatment'', "erectile dysfunction surgery'', and "cure erectile dysfunction'' were entered into the YouTube search bar. A total of 56 videos were included in the study. Videos' view counts; upload dates; like, dislike, and comment counts; uploader qualiﬁcations; length; and content were recorded. Video power index (VPI), Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information (DISCERN), and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) scores were determined. Results: Thirty-two (57.1%) videos consisted of real images, and 24 (42.9%) contained animated images. Twenty-four (42.9%) videos were uploaded by physicians, and 32 (57.1%) were uploaded by non-physicians. The mean like count of the videos was 5,307 ± 17.618, the mean dislike count was 560.07 ± 1548.07, and the mean comment count was 235 ± 373. The mean VPI value of the videos was calculated as 81.19 ± 21.19, the DISCERN score was 30.5 ± 8.1, and the JAMA score was 1.23 ± 0.55. Overall quality was very poor in 24 (42.9%) of the examined videos, poor in 21 (37.5%), average in 10 (17.9%), and good in one (1.8%). Conclusion: The overall quality of YouTube content on erectile dysfunction was not suﬃcient to provide reliable information for patients. Physicians should warn patients about the limitations of YouTube and direct them toward more appropriate sources of information.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 50%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An evaluation of YouTube video content regarding erectile dysfunction

2021

JOMH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are several studies in the literature evaluating the reliability of YTVs related to men's health conditions such as male infertility, premature ejaculation, erectile dysfunction, benign prostatic hyperplasia treatment, and prostate cancer that also found that most YTVs related to the evaluated subject are unacceptable as a patient education resource. 12 , 14 , 15 , 16 For example, Loeb et al found that there is widespread dissemination of misinformation about prostate cancer on YouTube and that less reliable videos had increased user engagement. 12 However, the present study is one of the only studies to show that there is reliable information on YouTube and that it could be acceptable to use as a patient education resource if patients are directed to videos featuring board-certified physicians.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

YouTube as a Patient Education Resource for Male Hypogonadism and Testosterone Therapy

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction YouTube is an unregulated platform that patients are using to learn about treatment options. Aim To assess the reliability of YouTube videos (YTVs) related to male hypogonadism and testosterone therapy. Methods Searching on YouTube by relevance and view count, we analyzed the top 10 videos (80 videos total) for the following search terms: low testosterone, testosterone replacement therapy, AndroGel, and hypogonadism. Main Outcome Measure We recorded the number of views for each video, evaluated videos using the DISCERN score (DS) criterion, and compared the DS for videos including board-certified physicians and videos without. A second comparison was made between videos with board-certified physicians in urology, endocrinology, other MD, and those without any physician. Results The YTVs analyzed received a total of 38,549,090 views, a median of 25,201 and 17.30 views/day. Videos that featured physicians had significantly fewer views/day than videos that did not (39.48 CI 9,72 vs 1,731 CI 330, 3,132; P = .019). Most YTVs studied were unreliable. The median DS across all videos was 2. However, most videos created by physicians were found to be reliable with a median DS of 4. In addition, YTVs that did not feature a physician were found to be significantly less reliable than videos that featured a physician (3.22 CI 3.06, 4.09 vs 1.87 CI 1.56, 2.18; P < .001). There was no significant difference in the reliability or viewership of YTVs stratified by physician type. Conclusion Most YTVs related to male hypogonadism/testosterone therapy were unreliable, but there are reliable YTVs available. Reliable videos usually feature a physician and receive fewer views than unreliable YTVs. Physicians and academic societies should work to provide verified videos to provide patients with reliable information about male hypogonadism and testosterone therapy. CJ Warren, J Wisener, B Ward, et al. YouTube as a Patient Education Resource for Male Hypogonadism and Testosterone Therapy. Sex Med 2021;9:100324.

show abstract

“…It was observed that 28% of 92 videos containing medical information contained misinformation. The results of their multivariate regression analysis revealed that all the parameters of videos uploaded by medical institutions had a statistically significant effect on DISCERN rating (30). In our study, the PEMAT score differed according to the upload source of the videos.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 49%

“…In addition, in the study conducted by Fode et al, it was emphasized that there was no barrier and/or restriction when uploading content to websites, especially in the field of health. In the same study, the authors observed that the majority of the videos had a DISCERN score of 3 or less (30). In a study by Huang et al, there was no difference in the median number of viewers and viewer interaction according to low or high DISCERN scores.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Are HoLEP Surgical Videos on YouTube Biased and Misleading or Are They Leading the Industry?

Koras¹,

Gokalp²,

Yıldırak³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: In this study, we aim to evaluate the content and quality of the most relevant YouTube videos related to Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) surgery. Materials and Methods: The keywords ‘HOLEP’, ‘laser enucleation’ and ‘prostate enucleation’ were used to perform a search on YouTube. Non-English language videos, videos with less than 4-minute duration, and repetitive videos were excluded. The reactions of the viewers to the videos were evaluated by recording the ‘total views’, ‘views/month’ and ‘likes and dislikes’ parameters. The data were divided into two groups based on the source of upload: Group 1 consisted of healthcare providers and Groups 2 comprised commercial companies and for-profit organizations. Results: A total of 117 videos were included in the study. A significant portion of the videos (77.7%) had been uploaded by healthcare providers. There was no statistically significant difference between the uploading groups in terms of the DISCERN and GQS scores (p=0.484 and p=0.108, respectively). However, the PEMAT understandability and actionability scores were statistically significantly higher in Group 2 (p=0.004 and p=0.022, respectively). In addition, when the misinformation scale was evaluated, there were significantly more videos with high-degree misinformation in Group 2 (5.5% vs 33.3, p=0.001). Conclusion: On video sharing platforms, such as YouTube, the number of reliable videos with accurate and appropriate guidance about diseases and treatments should be increased, and these videos should be allowed to be posted after they have been approved by relevant institutions, including healthcare associations and universities.

show abstract

Quality of Information in YouTube Videos on Erectile Dysfunction

Cited by 68 publications

References 18 publications

An evaluation of YouTube video content regarding erectile dysfunction

An evaluation of YouTube video content regarding erectile dysfunction

YouTube as a Patient Education Resource for Male Hypogonadism and Testosterone Therapy

Are HoLEP Surgical Videos on YouTube Biased and Misleading or Are They Leading the Industry?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About