YouTube as an information and education source for early orthodontic treatment

YouTube as a Patient Information Source for Gastrointestinal Reflux Disease

“…Videos that were factually correct as determined by the World Gastroenterology Organization (WGO) factsheet on GERD [ 7 ] were deemed true; otherwise, they were false. The quality and reliability of the YouTube videos on the aspects of GERD were assessed by Global Quality Scoring (GQS) and Reliability Scoring (RS)[ 8 ]. A pilot study of five videos was performed to test the questionnaire, changes for improvement were incorporated, and these videos were excluded from the study.…”

“…Global Quality Score has five points and the most appropriate score is selected for a YouTube video: 1 - poor quality, poor flow of the site, most information missing, not at all useful for patients; 2 - generally poor quality and poor flow, some information listed but many important topics missing, of very limited use to patients; 3 - moderate quality, suboptimal flow, some important information is adequately discussed but others poorly discussed, somewhat useful for patients; 4 - good quality and generally good flow, most of the relevant information is listed, but some topics not covered, useful for patients; and 5 - excellent quality and excellent flow, very useful for patients [ 8 ].…”

“…For each question, yes is scored as 1 and no as 0. The sum is calculated to give the final score [ 8 ].…”

A sustainable, self‐sufficient peer review algorithm for health‐related YouTube videos: A proposal

“…Considering the fact that not only healthcare professionals but also laypersons can upload videos to YouTube, the significant heterogeneity of the origin of uploaded videos determines the reliability and accuracy of the available information on diseases and their treatment (Azak et al, 2022; Kaval et al, 2022) Particularly, the videos presenting personal experiences and inferences inherit a higher risk to mislead the followers due to lack of evidence‐based information (Kovalski et al, 2019). However, the operating protocol of YouTube neither assesses the accuracy of the information nor filters the incorrect and inadequate content within the uploaded documents (Kaval et al, 2022; Öztürk & Gümüş, 2022). Thus, the public encounters the threat of being misled with false, subjective, or even biased health‐related information (Öztürk & Gümüş, 2022), and in some instances may end up with wrong decisions while seeking solutions for their health problems (Hassona et al, 2016; Öztürk & Gümüş, 2022).…”

“…However, the operating protocol of YouTube neither assesses the accuracy of the information nor filters the incorrect and inadequate content within the uploaded documents (Kaval et al, 2022; Öztürk & Gümüş, 2022). Thus, the public encounters the threat of being misled with false, subjective, or even biased health‐related information (Öztürk & Gümüş, 2022), and in some instances may end up with wrong decisions while seeking solutions for their health problems (Hassona et al, 2016; Öztürk & Gümüş, 2022). This fact also raises concerns with respect to the ethical and legal responsibilities of such platforms to the public (Özdede & Peker, 2020; Valcke & Lenaerts, 2010).…”