Cargando…
Quality of bladder cancer information on YouTube
INTRODUCTION: YouTube is one of the social networks most widely used as a source of information. However, there are doubts about the scientific quality of the information available. This study aims to characterise this by analysing videos about bladder cancer posted on YouTube. MATERIAL AND METHODS:...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Polish Urological Association
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9628723/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36381156 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2022.151 |
_version_ | 1784823248847896576 |
---|---|
author | García-Cano-Fernández, Alba Maria Szczesniewski-Dudzik, Juliusz Jan García-Tello, Ana Diego-García, Victoria Boronat-Catalá, Juan Llanes-González, Luis |
author_facet | García-Cano-Fernández, Alba Maria Szczesniewski-Dudzik, Juliusz Jan García-Tello, Ana Diego-García, Victoria Boronat-Catalá, Juan Llanes-González, Luis |
author_sort | García-Cano-Fernández, Alba Maria |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: YouTube is one of the social networks most widely used as a source of information. However, there are doubts about the scientific quality of the information available. This study aims to characterise this by analysing videos about bladder cancer posted on YouTube. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional descriptive study of the first 50 Spanish-language videos published on YouTube, leaving 38 for analysis. The videos were evaluated by three urologists using two validated questionnaires: Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) and DISCERN (quality criteria for consumer health information), classifying them according to the score of the latter, in poor quality (1–2 points) and moderate/good quality (3–5 points). RESULTS: The median PEMAT score was 71.6% (16–5–100%) for understanding and 35.5% (0–100%) for action. According to DISCERN, 26 videos (66.7%) were of poor quality and 12 (30.8%) of moderate/good quality. We found significant differences in terms of PEMAT of understanding (p = 0.004) and action (p = 0.000). In total, 90.9% of those involving medical staff were of low quality, which is paradoxical, but statistically significant (p = 0.01). Furthermore, 52.4% of those describing relevant information were of moderate/good quality, and 94.1% of those not describing relevant information were of poor quality (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: More than 60% of the videos published on YouTube about bladder cancer in Spanish are of low quality. This represents an important risk of misinformation for the general public to whom most of them are addressed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9628723 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Polish Urological Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96287232022-11-14 Quality of bladder cancer information on YouTube García-Cano-Fernández, Alba Maria Szczesniewski-Dudzik, Juliusz Jan García-Tello, Ana Diego-García, Victoria Boronat-Catalá, Juan Llanes-González, Luis Cent European J Urol Original Paper INTRODUCTION: YouTube is one of the social networks most widely used as a source of information. However, there are doubts about the scientific quality of the information available. This study aims to characterise this by analysing videos about bladder cancer posted on YouTube. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional descriptive study of the first 50 Spanish-language videos published on YouTube, leaving 38 for analysis. The videos were evaluated by three urologists using two validated questionnaires: Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) and DISCERN (quality criteria for consumer health information), classifying them according to the score of the latter, in poor quality (1–2 points) and moderate/good quality (3–5 points). RESULTS: The median PEMAT score was 71.6% (16–5–100%) for understanding and 35.5% (0–100%) for action. According to DISCERN, 26 videos (66.7%) were of poor quality and 12 (30.8%) of moderate/good quality. We found significant differences in terms of PEMAT of understanding (p = 0.004) and action (p = 0.000). In total, 90.9% of those involving medical staff were of low quality, which is paradoxical, but statistically significant (p = 0.01). Furthermore, 52.4% of those describing relevant information were of moderate/good quality, and 94.1% of those not describing relevant information were of poor quality (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: More than 60% of the videos published on YouTube about bladder cancer in Spanish are of low quality. This represents an important risk of misinformation for the general public to whom most of them are addressed. Polish Urological Association 2022-08-24 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9628723/ /pubmed/36381156 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2022.151 Text en Copyright by Polish Urological Association https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper García-Cano-Fernández, Alba Maria Szczesniewski-Dudzik, Juliusz Jan García-Tello, Ana Diego-García, Victoria Boronat-Catalá, Juan Llanes-González, Luis Quality of bladder cancer information on YouTube |
title | Quality of bladder cancer information on YouTube |
title_full | Quality of bladder cancer information on YouTube |
title_fullStr | Quality of bladder cancer information on YouTube |
title_full_unstemmed | Quality of bladder cancer information on YouTube |
title_short | Quality of bladder cancer information on YouTube |
title_sort | quality of bladder cancer information on youtube |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9628723/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36381156 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2022.151 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT garciacanofernandezalbamaria qualityofbladdercancerinformationonyoutube AT szczesniewskidudzikjuliuszjan qualityofbladdercancerinformationonyoutube AT garciatelloana qualityofbladdercancerinformationonyoutube AT diegogarciavictoria qualityofbladdercancerinformationonyoutube AT boronatcatalajuan qualityofbladdercancerinformationonyoutube AT llanesgonzalezluis qualityofbladdercancerinformationonyoutube |