Research Article
Year 2022,
Volume: 44 Issue: 1, 98 - 103, 30.03.2022
Abstract
Objective: We aimed to evaluate the quality of video content related to kidney transplantation on YouTube as a source of information.
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.
- 9. Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis--a wakeup call? J Rheumatol. 2012;39:899-903.
- 10. Canvasser NE, Ramo C, Morgan TM, Zheng K, Hollenbeck BK, Ghani KR. The use of social media in endourology: an analysis of the 2013 World Congress of Endourology meeting. J Endourol. 2015;29:615-20.
- 11. Salama A, Panoch J, Bandali E, Carroll A, Wiehe S, Downs S, Cain MP, Frankel R, Chan KH. Consulting "Dr. YouTube": an objective evaluation of hypospadias videos on a popular video-sharing website. J Pediatr Urol. 2020;16:70-9.
- 12. Culha Y, Culha MG, Acaroglu R. Evaluation of YouTube Videos Regarding Clean Intermittent Catheterization Application. Int Neurourol J. 2020;24:286-292.
- 13. Duran MB, Kizilkan Y. Quality analysis of testicular cancer videos on YouTube. Andrologia. 2021;53:e14118.
- 14. Culha Y, Seyhan Ak E, Merder E, Ariman A, Culha MG. Analysis of the YouTube videos on pelvic floor muscle exercise training in terms of their reliability and quality. Int Urol Nephrol. 2021;53:1-6..
- 15. Wong K, Doong J, Trang T, Joo S, Chien AL. YouTube Videos on Botulinum Toxin A for Wrinkles: A Useful Resource for Patient Education. Dermatol Surg. 2017;43:1466-1473.
- 16. Basch CH, Menafro A, Mongiovi J, Hillyer GC, Basch CE. A Content Analysis of YouTube™ Videos Related to Prostate Cancer. Am J Mens Health. 2017;11:154-157.
Year 2022,
Volume: 44 Issue: 1, 98 - 103, 30.03.2022
Abstract
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.
- 9. Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis--a wakeup call? J Rheumatol. 2012;39:899-903.
- 10. Canvasser NE, Ramo C, Morgan TM, Zheng K, Hollenbeck BK, Ghani KR. The use of social media in endourology: an analysis of the 2013 World Congress of Endourology meeting. J Endourol. 2015;29:615-20.
- 11. Salama A, Panoch J, Bandali E, Carroll A, Wiehe S, Downs S, Cain MP, Frankel R, Chan KH. Consulting "Dr. YouTube": an objective evaluation of hypospadias videos on a popular video-sharing website. J Pediatr Urol. 2020;16:70-9.
- 12. Culha Y, Culha MG, Acaroglu R. Evaluation of YouTube Videos Regarding Clean Intermittent Catheterization Application. Int Neurourol J. 2020;24:286-292.
- 13. Duran MB, Kizilkan Y. Quality analysis of testicular cancer videos on YouTube. Andrologia. 2021;53:e14118.
- 14. Culha Y, Seyhan Ak E, Merder E, Ariman A, Culha MG. Analysis of the YouTube videos on pelvic floor muscle exercise training in terms of their reliability and quality. Int Urol Nephrol. 2021;53:1-6..
- 15. Wong K, Doong J, Trang T, Joo S, Chien AL. YouTube Videos on Botulinum Toxin A for Wrinkles: A Useful Resource for Patient Education. Dermatol Surg. 2017;43:1466-1473.
- 16. Basch CH, Menafro A, Mongiovi J, Hillyer GC, Basch CE. A Content Analysis of YouTube™ Videos Related to Prostate Cancer. Am J Mens Health. 2017;11:154-157.
There are 16 citations in total.
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Health Care Administration |
| Journal Section | Surgical Science Research Articles |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | March 30, 2022 |
| Acceptance Date | March 24, 2022 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2022Volume: 44 Issue: 1 |