ASSESSING THE QUALITY OF YOUTUBE VIDEOS ON UTERINE FIBROIDS: A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION ACCURACY AND RELIABILITY

seema Rawat; nazia parveen; priyanka mathe

doi:10.33695/jss.v10i2.680

seema Rawat univeristy college of Medical Sciences, New Delhi , India
nazia parveen univeristy college of Medical Sciences, New Delhi , India
priyanka mathe univeristy college of Medical Sciences, New Delhi , India

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33695/jss.v10i2.680

Keywords: uterine fibroid, fibroid, patient education, internet, information

Abstract

YouTube has emerged as a popular platform for accessing health information, but studies have shown that videos on the platform often contain misleading and inaccurate content regarding medical conditions and procedures. This study aimed to evaluate the quality and reliability of YouTube videos related to uterine fibroids. Materials and Methods: A search was conducted using the keywords "uterine fibroid" and "fibroid," and the first 200 videos for each keyword were analyzed. Various factors such as video source, upload date, duration, views, likes, and dislikes were recorded. Video popularity was assessed using the video power index (VPI) and view ratio, while educational quality was evaluated using the DISCERN and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) scores.

Results: Out of the 400 identified videos, 174 were included in the analysis. The average video duration was 7.4 minutes, with an average of 136,420 views. Videos uploaded by physicians had significantly higher DISCERN and JAMA scores (p < 0.001). Although physicians constituted the main source of videos (42%), patient and commercial website uploads were more popular according to VPI and view ratios. There were negative correlations between the number of likes, view ratios, VPI, and quality scores. Additionally, longer videos had lower VPI scores and higher DISCERN and JAMA scores. Animated videos displayed significantly lower quality scores (p < 0.05), but had higher VPI scores (p < 0.01). Conclusion: In conclusion, the information on uterine fibroids available on YouTube was of low quality and unreliability. While videos uploaded by physicians generally had higher quality scores, users preferred low quality videos from patients and commercial websites. The findings suggest that physicians should aim to create short, comprehensive animated videos with limited technical information to provide accurate and reliable information to the general population, catering to the preferences of YouTube users.

References

[1] M. Wasserman, N. N. Baxter, B. Rosen, M. Burnstein, and A. L. Halverson, "Systematic review of internet patient information on colorectal cancer surgery," Dis. Colon Rectum., vol. 57, pp. 64-69, 2014.
[2] S. Fox, "Health topics," pewresearch.org, [Online]. Available: http://www.pewinternet.org/2011/02/01/health-topics-2/ (accessed: Jan. 2, 2023)
[3] U. Koller, W. Waldstein, K. D. Schatz, and R. Windhager, "YouTube provides irrelevant information for the diagnosis and treatment of hip arthritis," Int. Orthop., vol. 40, pp. 1995-2002, 2016.
[4] YouTube Official Blog, "Statistics for YouTube," San Bruno, CA: YouTube, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://blog.youtube/press/
[5] K. C. Madathil, A. J. Rivera-Rodriguez, J. S. Greenstein, and A. K. Gramopadhye, "Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review," Health Informatics J., vol. 21, pp. 173-194, 2015.
[6] J. T. Cassidy, E. Fitzgerald, E. S. Cassidy, et al., "YouTube provides poor information regarding anterior cruciate ligament injury and reconstruction," Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol and Arthroscopy ., vol. 26, pp. 840-845, 2018.
[7] H. B. Gokcen and G. Gumussuyu, "A quality analysis of disc herniation videos on YouTube," World Neurosurg., Feb. 2019.
[8] M. F. Ferhatoglu, A. Kartal, U. Ekici, and A. Gurkan, "Evaluation of the reliability, utility, and quality of the information in sleeve gastrectomy videos shared on open access video sharing platform YouTube," Obes. Surg., vol. 29, pp. 1477-1484, 2019.
[9] C. D. Ovenden and F. M. Brooks, "Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion YouTube videos as a source of patient education," Asian Spine J., vol. 12, pp. 987-991, 2018.
[10] K. N. Kunze, "Editorial commentary: YouTube videos provide poor-quality medical information: don’t believe what you watch!, " Arthroscopy, vol. 36, pp. 3048-3049, 2020.
[11] S. Pant, A. Deshmukh, K. Murugiah, G. Kumar, R. Sachdeva, and J. L. Mehta, "Assessing the credibility of the 'YouTube approach' to health information on acute myocardial infarction," Clin. Cardiol., vol. 35, pp. 281-285, 2012.
[12] D. Charnock, S. Shepperd, G. Needham, and R. Gann, "DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices," J. Epidemiol. Community Health, vol. 53, pp. 105-111, 1999.
[13] W. M. Silberg, G. D. Lundberg, and R. A. Musacchio, "Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: caveat lector et viewor—Let the reader and viewer beware," JAMA, vol. 277, pp. 1244–1245, 1997.
[14] M. N. Erdem and S. Karaca, "Evaluating the Accuracy and Quality of the Information in Kyphosis Videos Shared on YouTube," Spine (Phila Pa 1976), vol. 43, no. 22, pp. 1334–1339, Nov. 2018.
[15] A. Atigan, "Analysis of YouTube Videos on Pregnant COVID-19 Patients During the Pandemic Period," Cureus, vol. 14, no. 10, article e29934, Oct. 5, 2022.
[16] A. Y. Leong, R. Sanghera, J. Jhajj, N. Desai, B. S. Jammu, and M. J. Makowsky, "Is YouTube useful as a source of health information for adults with type 2 diabetes? A South Asian perspective," Can J Diabetes, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 395–403.e4, Aug. 2018.
[17] A. Radonjic, N. N. Fat Hing, J. Harlock, and F. Naji, "YouTube as a source of patient information for abdominal aortic aneurysms," J Vasc Surg, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 637–644, Feb. 2020.
[18] M. A. Aydin and H. Akyol, "Quality of information available on YouTube videos pertaining to thyroid cancer," J Cancer Educ, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 599–605, June 5, 2020.
[19] A. G. Singh, S. Singh, and P. P. Singh, "YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis--a wakeup call?" J Rheumatol, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 899–903, May 2012.
[20] B. Yuksel and K. Cakmak, "Healthcare information on YouTube: pregnancy and COVID-19," Int J Gynaecol Obstet, vol. 150, no. 2, pp. 189–193, Aug. 2020.
[21] R. A. Bruce-Brand, J. F. Baker, D. P. Byrne, N. A. Hogan, and T. McCarthy, "Assessment of the quality and content of information on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on the internet," Arthroscopy, vol. 29, pp. 1095–1100, 2013.
[22] J. S. Starman, F. K. Gettys, J. A. Capo, J. E. Fleischli, H. J. Norton, and M. A. Karunakar, "Quality and content of Internet-based information for ten common orthopaedic sports medicine diagnoses," J Bone Joint Surg Am, vol. 92, pp. 1612–1618, 2010.
[23] J. Keelan, V. Pavri-Garcia, G. Tomlinson, and K. Wilson, "YouTube as a source of information on immunization: a content analysis," JAMA, vol. 298, pp. 2482–2484, 2007.
[24] T. C. Biggs, J. H. Bird, P. G. Harries, and R. J. Salib, "YouTube as a source of information on rhinosinusitis: the good, the bad and the ugly," J Laryngol Otol, vol. 127, pp. 749–754, 2013.