Youtube videos as an information source about urinary incontinence

Baran, Caner; Baran, Şafak Yılmaz

doi:10.1016/j.jogoh.2021.102197

Cited by 17 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The total video length was 19.13 hours, and the mean video length was 11.48±11.96 minutes. In a study by Baran and Baran investigating YouTube™ videos as an information source about urinary incontinence, the total video duration was 12.60 hours [21]. In another study by Sledzinska et al investigating YouTube™ videos on meningioma treatment, the mean video length was 11.7±17.18 minutes [22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Evaluation of YouTube™ Videos Pertaining to Intraoperative Anaesthesia Awareness: A Reliability and Quality Analysis

Kartufan¹,

Bayram²

2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to evaluate the reliability and quality of YouTube™ (Google, Inc., Mountain View, CA) videos pertaining to anaesthesia awareness. MethodsWe evaluated the most commonly viewed 100 videos pertaining to anaesthesia awareness. The YouTube™ videos' image type, qualification of the uploaders, video content, video length in minutes, upload time, time since upload, total view count, daily view count and comment and like counts were recorded. The quality of the YouTube™ videos was evaluated using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), and the reliability was determined using the modified DISCERN scale. ResultsOf all videos, 34 (34%) were uploaded directly by physicians, 16 (16%) by patients, 14 (14%) by health channels, 13 (13%) by TV shows and 23 (23%) by others. The mean video length was 11.48±11.96 minutes. The average DISCERN score was 4.47±0.58 in the professional and 3.28±0.65 in the non-professional video group (p<0.001). The mean GQS score was 4.47±0.52 in the professional and 3.35±0.67 in the nonprofessional video group (p<0.001). ConclusionThe results of this study indicate that a significant portion of the YouTube™ videos pertaining to anaesthesia awareness were uploaded directly by physicians or by health channels. Physicians and professional health institutions should be promoted to provide accurate and more reliable videos to direct patients to the right solutions for their problems. YouTube™ videos should be subjected to supervision before they can be publicly viewed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Evaluation of YouTube™ Videos Pertaining to Intraoperative Anaesthesia Awareness: A Reliability and Quality Analysis

Kartufan¹,

Bayram²

2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies demonstrate similar findings where preclinical videos were scored and performed poorly according to the same methods used in this investigation. 3,15,[23][24][25] Videos with more views and more interaction (likes and dislikes) were more likely to have positive comments from viewers. Additionally, videos of longer duration correlated with more positive comments and were associated with more views.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating YouTube Videos on Facelift Surgery for Facial Rejuvenation as a Resource for Patients

Elliott

Campbell

et al. 2023

Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This study evaluated the content and patient educational quality of YouTube videos on facelift surgery for facial rejuvenation. This study investigated the relationship between education quality compared to video content, video metrics, and popularity. Methods: Two hundred videos were identified across 4 search terms: “facelift surgery,” “facelift surgery what to expect,” “facelift surgery patient education,” and “what is facelift surgery.” Unrelated videos, operating room recordings, medical professional lectures, non-English, non-audio, and testimonials were excluded from review. Video quality was assessed using the Global Quality Score (GQS) (range: 1-5), modified DISCERN score (range: 5-25), and JAMA Benchmark Criteria (range: 0-4). Secondary outcomes included upload source, video metrics (views, likes, dislikes, duration, days since upload, comments), and Video Power Indexto measure popularity. The first 10 comments on videos were characterized as positive, neutral, or negative. Results: One hundred forty-three videos were excluded (43 did not meet criteria, 100 duplicates), and 57 videos were included. Fifty-five videos (96.5%) were uploaded by private medical practices. Overall video quality was poor across all 3 scoring systems: GQS (2.92 ± 1.14), modified DISCERN (13.03 ± 3.64), and JAMA Benchmark Criteria (1.78 ± 0.52). Popularity positively correlated with JAMA Benchmark Criteria ( R = .49, P < .05) but did not correlate with other quality criteria. Conclusions: For patients undergoing facelift surgery, there are limited educational videos on YouTube with few videos detailing indications, alternatives, complications, and the postoperative course. YouTube is a growing resource for patient education and opportunities exist for medical institutions to produce higher-quality videos for prospective patients.

show abstract

“…A recent study has shown that patients who rely on the internet as their primary source of health information for prostate cancer are significantly more likely to report decisional regret and a worse‐than‐expected overall treatment experience 18 . Furthermore, many recent studies have found social media and online content about various urologic conditions to be low quality and inaccurate 19–26 . Given the expansive reach of both YT and TK, it is important to understand the scope of health information that is being made publicly available via these platforms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 18 Furthermore, many recent studies have found social media and online content about various urologic conditions to be low quality and inaccurate. 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 Given the expansive reach of both YT and TK, it is important to understand the scope of health information that is being made publicly available via these platforms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of prostate cancer screening recommendations for high‐risk populations on YouTube and TikTok

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate content quality and racial/ethnic representation, particularly of high-risk cohorts, of prostate cancer screening videos on You-Tube (YT) and TikTok (TK). Materials and Methods: The top 50 videos populated for the search term 'prostate cancer screening' on YT and TK that met inclusion criteria were retrieved in a cachecleared browser. Three reviewers analysed all videos using validated criteria for the quality of consumer health information (DISCERN and Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool [PEMAT]). High quality was defined as follows: DISCERN ≥ 4, PEMAT understandability ≥75% and PEMAT actionability ≥75%. A 5-point Likert scale was used to demonstrate the level of misinformation compared to American Urological Association and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Perceived race and ethnicity of people in the videos were assessed by consensus approach.Results: TK videos were shorter (median 3.7 vs. 0.5 min, p < 0.001) and had more views per month (5437.5 vs. 19.3, p = 0.03) than YT videos. Perceived Black and Hispanic representation was present in 10% and 6% of YT videos and 20% and 12% of TK videos, respectively. High-risk racial/ethnic groups were explicitly discussed in 46% of YT videos and 8% of TK videos. A total of 98% of YT videos and 100% of TK videos had low-to moderate-quality consumer health information, and 88% of YT videos and 100% of TK videos had moderate to high levels of misinformation based on screening guidelines.Conclusions: YT and TK videos about prostate cancer screening are widely viewed but do not provide quality consumer health information. Black and Hispanic men remain under-represented on both platforms, and high-risk racial groups were not discussed in most videos despite the importance for screening criteria. The low understandability and actionability, significant misinformation and lack of diversity in online videos support the need for higher quality videos with adequate attention to high-risk ethnic cohorts.

show abstract

Youtube videos as an information source about urinary incontinence

Cited by 17 publications

References 16 publications

The Evaluation of YouTube™ Videos Pertaining to Intraoperative Anaesthesia Awareness: A Reliability and Quality Analysis

The Evaluation of YouTube™ Videos Pertaining to Intraoperative Anaesthesia Awareness: A Reliability and Quality Analysis

Evaluating YouTube Videos on Facelift Surgery for Facial Rejuvenation as a Resource for Patients

Accuracy of prostate cancer screening recommendations for high‐risk populations on YouTube and TikTok

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About