Journal of clinical neuroscience : official journal of the Neurosurgical Society of Australasia · 2025
Reliability of online health information: evaluation of Guillain-Barré Syndrome videos on YouTube.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alpua Murat, Hamamcı Mehmet
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the content quality and reliability of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) videos published on YouTube.
METHODS: A total of 114 videos were reviewed, starting with the most viewed videos, based on the keyword "Guillain-Barré Syndrome." Fifty English videos meeting the eligibility criteria were included in the analysis. The videos were evaluated by two independent neurologists using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), mDISCERN, and JAMA criteria.
RESULTS: The mean GQS score for the videos was 3.08 ± 0.75, mDISCERN score was 3.14 ± 0.78, and JAMA score was 2.22 ± 0.76. Thirty-two percent of the videos were produced by health/medical information channels, 18 % by "other" producers, 14 % by patients, 12 % by physicians, and the remainder by associations, TV programs, hospitals, and other healthcare professionals. There were significant differences in quality scores between the producer groups; videos created by physicians had the highest scores for GQS (3.83 ± 0.41) and JAMA (2.83 ± 0.41) (p < 0.05). No significant correlation was found between the number of views and quality metrics, but the number of likes was positively correlated with GQS, mDISCERN, and JAMA scores (p < 0.05). The content quality of the most viewed videos was generally moderate.
CONCLUSION: Most GBS videos on YouTube have moderate quality and credibility. Higher scores for videos created by healthcare professionals highlight the importance of expert input in online health content. These findings suggest the need to develop scientifically based, accessible video content to reduce the risk of misinformation and increase patient and public health literacy.
METHODS: A total of 114 videos were reviewed, starting with the most viewed videos, based on the keyword "Guillain-Barré Syndrome." Fifty English videos meeting the eligibility criteria were included in the analysis. The videos were evaluated by two independent neurologists using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), mDISCERN, and JAMA criteria.
RESULTS: The mean GQS score for the videos was 3.08 ± 0.75, mDISCERN score was 3.14 ± 0.78, and JAMA score was 2.22 ± 0.76. Thirty-two percent of the videos were produced by health/medical information channels, 18 % by "other" producers, 14 % by patients, 12 % by physicians, and the remainder by associations, TV programs, hospitals, and other healthcare professionals. There were significant differences in quality scores between the producer groups; videos created by physicians had the highest scores for GQS (3.83 ± 0.41) and JAMA (2.83 ± 0.41) (p < 0.05). No significant correlation was found between the number of views and quality metrics, but the number of likes was positively correlated with GQS, mDISCERN, and JAMA scores (p < 0.05). The content quality of the most viewed videos was generally moderate.
CONCLUSION: Most GBS videos on YouTube have moderate quality and credibility. Higher scores for videos created by healthcare professionals highlight the importance of expert input in online health content. These findings suggest the need to develop scientifically based, accessible video content to reduce the risk of misinformation and increase patient and public health literacy.