Cargando…
Analysis of quality information provided by “Dr. YouTube(TM)” on Phimosis
The objective of the current study was to evaluate the quality of the information provided in YouTube(TM) videos on phimosis. The term “phimosis” was searched on YouTube(TM), and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for Audio/Visual Materials (Understandability and Actionability s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8942804/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35332276 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41443-022-00557-5 |
_version_ | 1784673385950740480 |
---|---|
author | Cilio, Simone Collà Ruvolo, Claudia Turco, Carmine Creta, Massimiliano Capece, Marco La Rocca, Roberto Celentano, Giuseppe Califano, Gianluigi Morra, Simone Melchionna, Alberto Mangiapia, Francesco Crocetto, Felice Verze, Paolo Palmieri, Alessandro Imbimbo, Ciro Mirone, Vincenzo |
author_facet | Cilio, Simone Collà Ruvolo, Claudia Turco, Carmine Creta, Massimiliano Capece, Marco La Rocca, Roberto Celentano, Giuseppe Califano, Gianluigi Morra, Simone Melchionna, Alberto Mangiapia, Francesco Crocetto, Felice Verze, Paolo Palmieri, Alessandro Imbimbo, Ciro Mirone, Vincenzo |
author_sort | Cilio, Simone |
collection | PubMed |
description | The objective of the current study was to evaluate the quality of the information provided in YouTube(TM) videos on phimosis. The term “phimosis” was searched on YouTube(TM), and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for Audio/Visual Materials (Understandability and Actionability sections, good-quality score of minimum 70%) and misinformation scale (rated from 1 to 5) were used to assess video quality. Quality assessment was investigated over time. Of all, 60 were eligible for analysis. Healthcare providers were the authors of 75.0% of the videos, and 73.3% of the videos were patient-targeted. The median Understandability score was 42.9% (interquartile range [IQR]:34.5–58.9) and ranged from 28.6 to 42.9% (2013–2020). The median Actionability score was 50.0% (IQR:25.0–56.2) and ranged from 25.0 to 50.0% (2013–2020). The median misinformation score was 2.8/5 (IQR:1.6–3.6), and although the score fluctuated over time, the median score was 2.6 both in 2013 and in 2020. According to our results, although an increase of PEMAT over time was observed, the overall quality of the information uploaded on YouTube(TM) is low. Therefore, at present, YouTube(TM) cannot be recommended as a reliable source of information on phimosis. Video producers should upload higher-quality videos to help physicians and patients in the decision-making process. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8942804 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89428042022-03-24 Analysis of quality information provided by “Dr. YouTube(TM)” on Phimosis Cilio, Simone Collà Ruvolo, Claudia Turco, Carmine Creta, Massimiliano Capece, Marco La Rocca, Roberto Celentano, Giuseppe Califano, Gianluigi Morra, Simone Melchionna, Alberto Mangiapia, Francesco Crocetto, Felice Verze, Paolo Palmieri, Alessandro Imbimbo, Ciro Mirone, Vincenzo Int J Impot Res Article The objective of the current study was to evaluate the quality of the information provided in YouTube(TM) videos on phimosis. The term “phimosis” was searched on YouTube(TM), and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for Audio/Visual Materials (Understandability and Actionability sections, good-quality score of minimum 70%) and misinformation scale (rated from 1 to 5) were used to assess video quality. Quality assessment was investigated over time. Of all, 60 were eligible for analysis. Healthcare providers were the authors of 75.0% of the videos, and 73.3% of the videos were patient-targeted. The median Understandability score was 42.9% (interquartile range [IQR]:34.5–58.9) and ranged from 28.6 to 42.9% (2013–2020). The median Actionability score was 50.0% (IQR:25.0–56.2) and ranged from 25.0 to 50.0% (2013–2020). The median misinformation score was 2.8/5 (IQR:1.6–3.6), and although the score fluctuated over time, the median score was 2.6 both in 2013 and in 2020. According to our results, although an increase of PEMAT over time was observed, the overall quality of the information uploaded on YouTube(TM) is low. Therefore, at present, YouTube(TM) cannot be recommended as a reliable source of information on phimosis. Video producers should upload higher-quality videos to help physicians and patients in the decision-making process. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-03-24 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC8942804/ /pubmed/35332276 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41443-022-00557-5 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited 2022 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Article Cilio, Simone Collà Ruvolo, Claudia Turco, Carmine Creta, Massimiliano Capece, Marco La Rocca, Roberto Celentano, Giuseppe Califano, Gianluigi Morra, Simone Melchionna, Alberto Mangiapia, Francesco Crocetto, Felice Verze, Paolo Palmieri, Alessandro Imbimbo, Ciro Mirone, Vincenzo Analysis of quality information provided by “Dr. YouTube(TM)” on Phimosis |
title | Analysis of quality information provided by “Dr. YouTube(TM)” on Phimosis |
title_full | Analysis of quality information provided by “Dr. YouTube(TM)” on Phimosis |
title_fullStr | Analysis of quality information provided by “Dr. YouTube(TM)” on Phimosis |
title_full_unstemmed | Analysis of quality information provided by “Dr. YouTube(TM)” on Phimosis |
title_short | Analysis of quality information provided by “Dr. YouTube(TM)” on Phimosis |
title_sort | analysis of quality information provided by “dr. youtube(tm)” on phimosis |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8942804/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35332276 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41443-022-00557-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ciliosimone analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT collaruvoloclaudia analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT turcocarmine analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT cretamassimiliano analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT capecemarco analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT laroccaroberto analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT celentanogiuseppe analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT califanogianluigi analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT morrasimone analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT melchionnaalberto analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT mangiapiafrancesco analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT crocettofelice analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT verzepaolo analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT palmierialessandro analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT imbimbociro analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis AT mironevincenzo analysisofqualityinformationprovidedbydryoutubetmonphimosis |