Metric Evaluation of Reliability and Transparency of the Videos About Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Surgery in the Online Platforms: Assessment of YouTube Videos' Content

The Quality of Short Videos as a Source of Coronary Heart Disease Information on TikTok: Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a leading cause of death worldwide and imposes a significant economic burden. TikTok has risen as a favored platform within the social media sphere for disseminating CHD-related information and stands as a pivotal resource for patients seeking knowledge about CHD. However, the quality of such content on TikTok remains largely unexplored.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the quality of information conveyed in TikTok CHD-related videos.

METHODS

A comprehensive cross-sectional study was undertaken on TikTok videos related to CHD. The sources of the videos were identified and analyzed. The comprehensiveness of content was assessed through 6 questions addressing the definition, signs and symptoms, risk factors, evaluation, management, and outcomes. The quality of the videos was assessed using 3 standardized evaluative instruments: DISCERN, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, and the Global Quality Scale (GQS). Furthermore, correlative analyses between video quality and characteristics of the uploaders and the videos themselves were conducted.

RESULTS

The search yielded 145 CHD-related videos from TikTok, predominantly uploaded by health professionals (n=128, 88.3%), followed by news agencies (n=6, 4.1%), nonprofit organizations (n=10, 6.9%), and for-profit organizations (n=1, 0.7%). Content comprehensiveness achieved a median score of 3 (IQR 2-4). Median values for the DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS evaluations across all videos stood at 27 (IQR 24-32), 2 (IQR 2-2), and 2 (IQR 2-3), respectively. Videos from health professionals and nonprofit organizations attained significantly superior JAMA scores in comparison to those of news agencies (P<.001 and P=.02, respectively), whereas GQS scores for videos from health professionals were also notably higher than those from news agencies (P=.048). Within health professionals, cardiologists demonstrated discernibly enhanced performance over noncardiologists in both DISCERN and GQS assessments (P=.02). Correlative analyses unveiled positive correlations between video quality and uploader metrics, encompassing the positive correlations between the number of followers; total likes; average likes per video; and established quality indices such as DISCERN, JAMA, or GQS scores. Similar investigations relating to video attributes showed correlations between user engagement factors-likes, comments, collections, shares-and the aforementioned quality indicators. In contrast, a negative correlation emerged between the number of days since upload and quality indices, while a longer video duration corresponded positively with higher DISCERN and GQS scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the videos was generally poor, with significant disparities based on source category. The content comprehensiveness coverage proved insufficient, casting doubts on the reliability and quality of the information relayed through these videos. Among health professionals, video contributions from cardiologists exhibited superior quality compared to noncardiologists. As TikTok's role in health information dissemination expands, ensuring accurate and reliable content is crucial to better meet patients' needs for CHD information that conventional health education fails to fulfill.

YouTube as a Source of Patient Information for Cubital Tunnel Syndrome: An Analysis of Video Reliability, Quality, and Content

BACKGROUND

This study seeks to examine the reliability, quality, and content of YouTube videos on cubital tunnel syndrome, on which there is presently a paucity of information.

METHODS

The top 50 unique YouTube videos by relevance resulting from the Boolean search term "cubital tunnel + cubital tunnel syndrome" were identified, with video properties for analysis including source, upload date, duration, views, and comments. Content was assessed using the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) criteria, the Global Quality Score (GQS), and a "Cubital Tunnel-Specific Score" (CTSS).

RESULTS

The average video saw 72 108 ± 199 362 views, with videos produced by allied (nonphysician) health professionals demonstrating the highest mean views (111 789 ± 294 471 views). Videos demonstrated low mean JAMA scores (2.4/4 ± 0.7), GQS (2.8/5 ± 1.3), and CTSS (7.5/21 ± 4.3), with academic and nonacademic physician videos demonstrating significantly greater mean GQS and CTSS scores when compared with videos by allied health professionals. Positive independent predictors for GQS included academic sources (β = 1.871), nonacademic physician sources (β = 1.651), and video duration (β = 0.102), which were likewise positive predictors for CTSS (β = 4.553, 4.639, 0.374). Content relating to surgical techniques or approaches for cubital tunnel decompression had the greatest CTSS scores (11.2 [4.2]).

CONCLUSIONS

YouTube is a source of highly accessible information on cubital tunnel syndrome, although the average video presents generally poor and inadequate information. Directing patients toward higher quality video resources can be a meaningful component of patient education.

Users' experience with health-related content on YouTube: an exploratory study

BACKGROUND

This study focuses on health-related content (HRC) on YouTube and addresses the issue of misinformation on this platform. While previous research centered on content evaluations by experts, this study takes a user-centered approach and aims to explore users' experiences with and perceptions of HRC videos and to establish links between these perceptions and some socio-demographic characteristics including age, gender, profession, and educational level.

METHODS

A quantitative research design was used in the study. 3,000 YouTube users responded to a 35-item anonymous questionnaire to collect information about the content they watch toward decision-making, their perceptions of the usefulness and bias of this content, what they identify as quality indicators for HRC, and what they recommend to improve the quality of such content on YouTube. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, frequency, and correlation analyses.

RESULTS

The results reveal that 87.6 percent (n=2630) of the participants watch HRC on YouTube, and 84.7 percent (n=2542) make decisions based on what they watch. Exercise and bodybuilding videos are the most popular, with over half of the participants watching them. 40 percent of the users watch YouTube videos to decide whether to consult a doctor or adopt specific health-related practices. In contrast to evaluations by experts in previous studies, most respondents perceive HRC videos on YouTube as useful and do not find connections between video quality and surface features like the number of views and likes. Weak or no correlations were observed between the perceived usefulness of HRC videos and age, gender, profession, or educational level. Participants' recommendations for enhancing HRC quality align with previous research findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Users turn to YouTube not only for health information but also as a decision-making tool. Combined with their generally positive attitudes towards content quality on this platform, this can have significant consequences for their health. Follow-up studies are needed to get more insights into decision-making behaviors and how users assess their decisions in retrospect.

TikTok video as a health education source of information on heart failure in China: a content analysis

Background

Heart failure (HF) is a complex and life-threatening syndrome associated with significant morbidity and mortality. While TikTok has gained popularity as a social media platform for sharing HF-related information, the quality of such content on TikTok remains unexplored.

Methods

A cross-sectional analysis was conducted on TikTok videos related to HF in China. The sources of the videos were identified and analyzed. The content comprehensiveness of the videos was evaluated using six questions that covered definition, signs and symptoms, risk factors, evaluation, management, and outcomes. The reliability and quality of the videos were assessed using three standardized evaluation instruments: DISCERN, JAMA benchmarks, and the Global Quality Scale. Additionally, the correlation between video quality and video characteristics was further investigated.

Results

Among the video sources, 92.2% were attributed to health professionals, while news agencies and non-profit organizations accounted for 5.7% and 2.1%, respectively. The content comprehensiveness score for the videos was 3.36 (SD 3.56), with news agencies receiving the highest scores of 4.06 (SD 3.31). The median DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS scores for all 141 videos were 26.50 (IQR 25.00-28.750), 2.00 (IQR 2.00-2.00), and 2.00 (IQR 2.00-2.00), respectively. Videos from health professionals had significantly higher JAMA scores compared to those from non-profit organizations (P < 0.01). Correlation analysis between video quality and video characteristics showed positive correlations between content comprehensiveness scores and video duration (r = 0.420, P < 0.001), number of comments (r = 0.195, P < 0.05), and number of shares (r = 0.174, P < 0.05). GQS scores were negatively or positively correlated with the number of days since upload (r = -0.212, P < 0.05) and video duration (r = 0.442, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

The overall quality of the videos was found to be unsatisfactory, with variations in quality scores observed across different video sources. Content comprehensiveness was inadequate, the reliability and quality of the information presented in the videos was questionable. As TikTok continues to grow as a platform for health information, it is essential to prioritize accuracy and reliability to enhance patients' self-care abilities and promote public health.

Quality of Spine Surgery Information on Social Media: A DISCERN Analysis of TikTok Videos

OBJECTIVE

The use of social media applications to disseminate information has substantially risen in recent decades. Spine and back pain-related hashtags have garnered several billion views on TikTok. As such, these videos, which share experiences, offer entertainment, and educate users about spinal surgery, have become increasingly influential. Herein, we assess the quality of spine surgery content TikTok from providers and patients.

METHODS

Fifty hashtags encompassing spine surgery ("#spinalfusion," "#scoliosissurgery," and "#spinaldecompression") were searched using TikTok's algorithm and included. Two independent reviewers rated the quality of each video via the DISCERN questionnaire. Video metadata (likes, shares, comments, views, length) were all collected; type of content creator (musculoskeletal, layperson) and content category (educational, patient experience, entertainment) were determined.

RESULTS

The overall DISCERN score was, on average, 24.4. #Spinalfusion videos demonstrated greater engagement, higher average likes (p = 0.02), and more comments (p < 0.001) compared to #spinaldecompression and #scoliosissurgery. #Spinaldecompression had the highest DISCERN score (p < 0.001), likely explained by the higher percentage of videos that were educational (p < 0.001) and created by musculoskeletal (MSK) professionals (p < 0.001). Compared to laypersons, MSK professionals had significantly higher quality videos (p < 0.001). Similarly, the educational category demonstrated higher quality videos (p < 0.001). Video interaction trended lower with MSK videos and educational videos had the lowest interaction of the content categories (likes: p = 0.023, comments: p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

The quality of spine surgery videos on TikTok is low. As the influence of the new social media landscape governs how the average person consumes information, MSK providers should participate in disseminating high-quality content.

Patient-Directed Online Education for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Release: Analysis of What Patients Ask and Quality of Resources

Purpose

This study classifies common questions searched by patients from the Google search engine and categorizes the types and quality of online education resources used by patients regarding carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and carpal tunnel release (CTR).

Methods

Google's results were extracted and compiled using the "People also ask" function for frequent questions and associated web pages for CTS and CTR. Questions were categorized using Rothwell's classification with further topic subcategorization. Web pages were evaluated by using Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Criteria for source quality.

Results

Of the 600 questions evaluated, "How do I know if I have carpal tunnel or tendonitis?" and "What causes carpal tunnel to flare up?" were the most commonly investigated questions for CTS. For CTR, frequent questions investigated included "How long after hand surgery can I drive" and "How do you wipe after carpal tunnel surgery." The most common questions for CTS by Rothwell classification were policy (51%), fact (41%), and value (8%) with the highest subcategories being indications/management (46%) and technical details (27%). For CTR, the most common questions entailed fact (54%), policy (34%), and value (11%) with the highest subcategories as technical details (31%) and indications/management (26%). The most common web pages were academic and medical practice. The mean Journal of the American Medical Association score for all 600 web pages was 1.43, with journals (mean = 3.91) having the highest score and legal (mean = 0.52) and single surgeon practice websites (mean = 0.28) having the lowest scores.

Conclusions

Patients frequently inquire online about etiology, precipitating factors, diagnostic criteria, and activity restrictions regarding CTS/CTR. Overall, the quality of online resources for this topic was poor, especially from single surgeon practices and legal websites.

Clinical relevance

Understanding the type and quality of information patients are accessing assists physicians in tailoring counseling to patient concerns and facilitates informed decision-making regarding CTS/CTR as well as guiding patients to high-quality online searches.

Evaluating YouTube as a Source of Education for Patients Undergoing Surgery: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review is to characterize the peer-reviewed literature investigating YouTube as a source of patient education for patients undergoing surgery.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

YouTube is the largest online video sharing platform and has become a substantial source of health information that patients are likely to access before surgery, yet there has been no systematic assessment of peer-reviewed studies. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Ovid HealthStar from inception through to December of 2021.

METHODS

All primary studies evaluating YouTube as a source of patient education relating to surgical procedures (general, cardiac, urology, otolaryngology, plastic, vascular) were included. Study screening and data extraction occurred in duplicate with two reviewers. Characteristics extracted included video length, view count, upload source, overall video educational quality, and quality of individual studies.

RESULTS

Among 6,453 citations, 56 studies were identified that examined 6,797 videos with 547 hours of content and 1.39 billion views. There were 49 studies that evaluated the educational quality of the videos. A total of 43 quality assessment tools were used, with each study using a mean of 1.90 assessment tools. Per the global rating for assessments, 34/49 studies (69%) concluded that the overall quality of educational content was poor.

CONCLUSIONS

While the impact of non-peer-reviewed YouTube videos on patient knowledge for surgery is unclear, the large amount of online content suggests that they are in demand. The overall educational content of these videos is poor, however, and there is substantial heterogeneity in the quality assessment tools used in their evaluation. A peer-reviewed and standardized approach to online education with video content is needed to better support patients.

Is the information about lateral epicondylitis on the YouTube platform reliable and of good quality?

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the quality and reliability of YouTube videos, as a source of lateral epicondylitis (LE).

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 484 videos were analyzed by searching the YouTube platform with the keyword 'lateral epicondylitis.' Journal of the Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, modified DISCERN and Global Quality Scale (GQS) were used for quality and reliability assessments.

RESULTS

A total of 298 videos were evaluated. High quality (GQS 4-5) was identified in 74 videos (24.8%), intermediate quality (GQS 3) in 84 videos (28.2%), and low quality (GQS 1-2) in 140 videos (47%). Of the videos, 57.7% (n = 41) uploaded by physician were of high quality. A significant difference was found between the low-intermediate-high-quality groups in terms of duration, number of views, number of likes, number of comments, likes per day, comments per day, video view ratio, JAMA score and modified DISCERN score (all p < 0.01). In videos uploaded by physicians; views, time since uploaded, JAMA score, modified DISCERN score, and GQS score were significantly higher than videos shared by trainers, health-related web sites, and independent users. The duration and viewing rates of the videos, the number of views, likes, comments, likes per day and comments per day were found to be significantly associated with JAMA, modified DISCERN, and GQS scores (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

About half of YouTube videos for LE were low quality. Most of the high-quality videos have been shared by physicians and these videos have been longer, more viewed, more liked and commented, and more reliable. Healthcare professionals should provide high-quality, unbiased, accurate and instructive information that is accessible to everyone on the YouTube platform.

Systematic YouTube Review - Trigger Finger Release

Background: With lack of regulation and incentivisation on YouTube for high-quality healthcare information, it is important to objectively evaluate the quality of information on trigger finger - a common condition for hand surgeon referral. Methods: YouTube was queried (11/21/2021) for videos on trigger finger release surgery. Videos were excluded if they were about unrelated topics or not in English. The most viewed 59 videos were categorised by source as physician or non-physician. Two independent reviewers quantified the reliability, quality and content of each video, with inter-rater reliability assessed using Kohen's Kappa test. Reliability was assessed using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) score. Quality was assessed using the DISCERN score with high-quality videos defined as those with scores in the sample upper 25th percentile. Content was assessed using the informational content score (ICS) with scores in the sample upper 25th percentile indicating more complete information. Two-sample t-tests and logistic regression were used to assess variations between sources. Results: Videos by physicians had higher DISCERN quality (42.6 ± 7.9, 36.4 ± 10.3; p = 0.02) and informational content (5.8 ± 2.6, 4.0 ± 1.7; p = 0.01) scores compared to those by non-physician sources. Videos by physicians were associated with increased odds of high-quality (Odds Ratio [OR] 5.7, 95% Confidence Interval [95% CI] 1.3-41.3) and provided more complete patient information (OR 6.3, 95% CI 1.4-48.9). The lowest DISCERN sub-scores for all videos were discussion of the uncertainties and risks associated with surgery. The lowest ICS for all videos were in the diagnosis of trigger finger (11.9%) and non-surgical prognosis (15.3%). Conclusions: Physician videos have more complete and higher quality information on trigger finger release. Additionally, discussion of treatment risks, areas of uncertainty, the diagnostic process, non-surgical prognosis and transparency on references used were identified as lacking content. Level of Evidence: Level III (Therapeutic).

The quality of YouTube videos related to patellofemoral pain syndrome is insufficient

BACKGROUND

Videos uploaded to YouTube do not go through a review process. The educational aspect of these videos may be insufficient for patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFP).

OBJECTIVE

To examine the reliability and educational quality of PFP videos on YouTube.

METHODS

A standard search was performed in the YouTube database using the following terms: patellofemoral pain syndrome/anterior knee pain syndrome/anterior knee pain/patellofemoral pain. For each search term, the top 50 videos based on "relevance" assignment of YouTube's algorithm were included in the examination. The remaining 96 videos after exclusion were included in the study. The educational quality and reliability of videos was analyzed using DISCERN, JAMA (The criteria of Journal of the American Medical Association), GQS (Global Quality Score) and PFPSS (Patellofemoral Pain Specific Score).

RESULTS

According to PFPSS, 81.2% of the videos were evaluated as low and very low quality. According to the DISCERN classification, 74.9% of the videos were evaluated as poor and very poor. According to GQS, 59.4% of the videos had scores of 2 or less, which were considered poor quality. According to JAMA, 41.7% of the videos scored 2 and below.

CONCLUSIONS

The information content of YouTube videos is inadequate. Video design should be created to be understandable by patients and to attract their attention while making these videos.