Quality Analysis of the Youtube Videos on Kidney Transplantation
Abstract
Method: 117 YouTube videos were included in this study. Utilization of Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) score, Global Quality Scale (GQS) and modified DISCERN score were approved for quality assessment.
Results: Stand-alone health information websites comprised 35.9% of all video resources. The quality of the videos from universities/professional organizations/nonprofit physicians/physicians was generally better than the videos from other sources (p<0.001). According to the modified DISCERN score, the quality level of 72.6% of the video contents classified as poor. A positive correlation drew attention between the scores and the duration of videos (p<0.001).
Conclusions: We think that the quality of the video content about kidney transplantation on YouTube is quite insufficient. The best quality of content was provided by universities/professional organisations/nonprofit physicians/physicians among all videos.
Keywords
References
- 1. United States Renal Data System. 2016 USRDS annual data report: Epidemiology of kidney disease in the United States. End-stage renal disease (ESRD) in the United States, Volume 2. Bethesda, MD: National 2262 H. Kanda et al. / Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia 31 (2017) 2251–2267 Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; 215–602
- 2. Liyanage T, Ninomiya T, Jha V, Neal B, Patrice HM, Okpechi I, Zhao MH, Lv J, Garg AX, Knight J, Rodgers A, Gallagher M, Kotwal S, Cass A, Perkovic V. Worldwide access to treatment for end-stage kidney disease: a systematic review. Lancet. 2015;16:1975-82.
- 3. Tonelli M, Wiebe N, Knoll G, Bello A, Browne S, Jadhav D, Klarenbach S, Gill J. Systematic review: kidney transplantation compared with dialysis in clinically relevant outcomes. Am J Transplant. 2011;11:2093-109.
- 4. Fode M, Nolsøe AB, Jacobsen FM, Russo GI, Østergren PB, Jensen CFS, Albersen M, Capogrosso P, Sønksen J; EAU YAU Men's Health Working Group. Quality of Information in YouTube Videos on Erectile Dysfunction. Sex Med. 2020;8:408-413.
- 5. Ozsoy-Unubol T, Alanbay-Yagci E. YouTube as a source of information on fibromyalgia. Int J Rheum Dis. 2021;24:197-202.
- 6. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor--Let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA. 1997;277:1244-5.
- 7. Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, Rose C, Leddin D, Veldhuyzen van Zanten S. A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:2070-7.
- 8. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999;53:105-11.
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Health Care Administration
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Sedat Taştemur
0000-0003-0534-2520
Türkiye
Samet Şenel
*
0000-0003-2280-4192
Türkiye
Yusuf Kasap
0000-0001-5313-2611
Türkiye
Emre Uzun
0000-0002-3005-2122
Türkiye
Erkan Ölçücüoğlu
0000-0002-9101-5253
Türkiye
Publication Date
March 30, 2022
Submission Date
February 26, 2022
Acceptance Date
March 24, 2022
Published in Issue
Year 2022 Volume: 44 Number: 1
Cited By
Quality analysis of YouTube videos in the management of hyperlipidemia in adults
Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine
https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1344870Evaluation of YouTube videos about cupping therapy
Journal of Medicine and Palliative Care
https://doi.org/10.47582/jompac.1766816