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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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