YouTube™ as a source of information for Candida auris infection: a systematic review

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

INTRODUCTION

The 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.

METHODS

The 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.

RESULTS

A 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.

CONCLUSION

YouTube™ 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.

Bilibili, TikTok, and YouTube as sources of information on gastric cancer: assessment and analysis of the content and quality

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer has attracted widespread attention on social media due to its high incidence and severity. The Bilibili, TikTok, and YouTube video-sharing platforms have received considerable interest among general health consumers. Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether the information in videos on these platforms is of satisfactory content and quality.

METHODS

A total of 300 eligible videos related to gastric cancer were screened from three video-sharing platforms, Bilibili, TikTok, and YouTube, for assessment and analysis. First, the basic information presented in the videos was recorded. Next, we identified the source and content type of each video. Then, the Global Quality Scale (GQS), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), and Modified DISCERN were used to assess the educational content and quality of each video. A comparative analysis was undertaken of the videos procured from these three sources.

RESULTS

We identified six categories of uploaders of the 300 videos: 159 videos (53%) were uploaded by health professionals, 21 videos (7%) by users in science communications, 29 videos (9.67%) by general users, 27 videos (9%) from news agencies, 63 videos (12%) by nonprofit organizations, and one video (0.33%) by a for-profit organization. In terms of the content types of the 300 videos, we identified five distinct categories. There were 48 videos (16%) on early signals, 12 videos (4%) on late symptoms, 40 videos (13.33%) on etiologies and causations, 160 videos (53.33%) on scientific introductions, and 40 videos (13.33%) on treatment methods. The overall quality of the videos was evaluated by the GQS, JAMA, and Modified DISCERN and was found to be medium, with scores of 2.6/5, 2.41/4, and 2.71/5 points, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This innovative study demonstrates that videos on social media platforms can help the public learn about early signals, late symptoms, treatment methods, etiologies and causations, and scientific introductions of gastric cancer. However, both the content and quality of uploaded recordings are inadequate currently. More efforts should be made to enhance the content and quality of videos on gastric cancer and to increase public awareness.

YouTube as a source of information for cryptococcal infection: A cross-sectional study

Objective

Immunocompromised individuals, particularly HIV patients, worldwide are at risk from cryptococcal infection. There are a number of videos of cryptococcal infection and more and more individuals may search these videos, but the quality of videos on YouTube is unclear. This study set out to assess the content and quality of YouTube videos regarding cryptococcal infection.

Methods

The keywords "Cryptococcus," "Cryptococcosis" and "Cryptococcal infection" were searched on YouTube. The videos were evaluated and graded by two impartial raters. A 14-point content score was used to categorize videos as bad, good or exceptional. The reliability and quality were evaluated utilizing the DISCERN instrument and a 5-point global quality score. Videos were then divided into groups based on uploading sources and content types.

Results

A total of 46 videos were located, and the ratings provided by the two raters were identical. Our scoring algorithm determined that 54.3% (n = 25), 32.6% (n = 15) and 13.0% (n = 6) of the videos were poor, decent and exceptional, respectively. Regarding quality, no difference was identified between the various video categories. The global quality scale, number of views, days posted, content score and DISCERN showed a significant positive relationship.

Conclusions

Professional individuals or healthcare organizations should be encouraged to submit high-quality videos for the expanding internet population, as only a small proportion of available videos had exceptional quality.

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

Aim The objective of this study was to evaluate the reliability and quality of YouTube™ (Google, Inc., Mountain View, CA) videos pertaining to anaesthesia awareness. Methods We 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. Results Of 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 non-professional video group (p<0.001). Conclusion The 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.

Paradigm shift: Beyond the COVID-19 era, is YouTube the future of education for CABG patients?

INTRODUCTION

Patients commonly use YouTube for education, and this may have increased due to COVID-19 related restrictions on access to healthcare professionals. However, YouTube videos lack peer review and regulation. To assess patient education in the COVID-19 era, we analyzed the quality of YouTube videos on coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.

METHODS

We searched YouTube using the phrase "coronary artery bypass graft." Two authors individually used the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), DISCERN, and Health on the Net (HON) systems, to rate the first 50 videos retrieved. Data collected for each video included; number of views, duration since upload, percentage positivity (proportion of likes relative to total likes plus dislikes), number of comments, and video author. Interobserver reliability was assessed using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Associations between video characteristics and quality were tested using linear regression or t-tests.

RESULTS

The average number of views was 575,571. Average quality was poor, with mean scores of 1.93/4 (ICC 0.54) for JAMA criteria, 2.52/5 (ICC 0.78) for DISCERN criteria, and 4.04/8 (ICC 0.66) for HON criteria. Videos uploaded by surgeons scored highest overall (p < .05). No other factors demonstrated significant association with video quality.

CONCLUSION

YouTube videos on CABG surgery are of poor quality and may be inadequate for patient education. Given the complexity of the procedure and that beyond the COVID-19 era, patients are more likely to seek education from digital sources, treating surgeons should advise of YouTube's limitations and direct patients to reliable sources of information.

Analysis of quality, usefulness, reliability, visibility, and popularity of videos about dental caries on YouTube: A cross-sectional analysis

Objectives:

YouTube is the most popular social media and is widely used to access dental and oral diseases information. Nonetheless, the quality of online health information remains a problem. This study aimed to analyze the quality, usefulness, reliability, visibility, and popularity of YouTube videos about dental caries as a source of information.

Materials and Methods:

The study design was a cross-sectional analytical study. Here, 300 videos that were uploaded in September 2019–2020 were screened, and total duration, number of views, number of likes, number dislikes, uploader category (individual users or health professionals), and upload date of the videos were recorded. One hundred videos were analyzed in terms of their quality, usefulness, reliability, visibility, and popularity using the Global Quality Scale, usefulness score, DISCERN, viewing rate, and interaction index, respectively.

Results:

Videos were 78% uploaded by individual users. Videos uploaded by health professionals showed high scores in quality, usefulness, and reliability. Videos that were greater than 6 min long exhibited both better quality and higher popularity. Video with good-quality showed high visibility and popularity. In addition, videos with better usefulness and reliability showed high visibility; however, their popularity was low.

Conclusions:

Information about dental caries on YouTube is limited in quality. YouTube videos have a potentially important role in oral health education.

Quality and Reliability of Halitosis Videos on YouTube as a Source of Information

Halitosis is a common condition that adversely affects quality of life. Through YouTube, people access oral health information. This study aimed to analyze the quality and comprehensiveness of the content, and reliability of halitosis videos hosted on YouTube. In total, 300 videos were collected based on three search keywords, and the number of likes, dislikes, views, duration, interaction index, viewing rate, and source category. Subsequently, the video score, which represents the content quality and comprehensiveness was used to categorize videos as poor, good, and excellent. DISCERN score was used to assess video reliability. Of the 105 videos analyzed, 68 (64.8%) were uploaded by personal users. In general, videos were categorized as poor and have low reliability. Videos sourced from healthcare professionals showed the highest quality, comprehensiveness of the content, and reliability (p < 0.05). There was no difference in the number of viewers for video duration less than or more than 4 min (p > 0.05). YouTube users prefer low-quality videos over high-quality ones, indicating that viewers cannot differentiate between reliable and potentially biased content. It is critical to enable viewers to critically assimilate information hosted on YouTube to make effective oral healthcare decisions.

YouTube videos as a source of information concerning Behçet's disease: a reliability and quality analysis

In this study, we aimed to investigate the reliability and quality of YouTube videos concerning Behçet disease, for the first time in the literature. The most viewed 50 YouTube videos about Behçet disease were included. Study data used in the analysis included video length, image type, video content, uploaders, time since the date of upload, the number of total views, daily views, and the numbers of like, dislike and comments. The Video Power Index was used to determine popularity of the videos. Reliability and quality of the videos were evaluated using DISCERN and Global Quality Scale (GQS) instruments. The examined YouTube videos were divided into two groups as uploaded by professionals (physicians, health and hospital channels, institutions and societies) and non-professionals (patients, social organizations, others). Twenty-three (46%) videos were uploaded by professionals. The mean DISCERN score was found as 3.98 ± 0.77 in the videos uploaded by healthcare professionals and 2.83 ± 0.64 in those uploaded by non-professionals (p < 0.01). The mean GQS score was found as 4.09 ± 0.72 in the videos uploaded by healthcare professionals and 3.41 ± 0.69 in those uploaded by non-professionals (p < 0.01). 46% of the videos were of low-to-moderate reliability and 56% of low-to-moderate quality. Nearly half of the YouTube videos concerning Behçet disease were uploaded by non-physician sources with poor reliability and quality. Physicians should be encouraged to upload more professional videos to help and guide patients appropriately. YouTube videos should be subjected to an objective evaluation for content quality before they can be published.