MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.24171/j.phrp.2017.8.4.10

Медицинская библиотека · Osong public health and research perspectives · 2017

Lyme Disease and YouTube TM: A Cross-Sectional Study of Video Contents.

Basch Corey H, Mullican Lindsay A, Boone Kwanza D, Yin Jingjing, Berdnik Alyssa, Eremeeva Marina E, Fung Isaac Chun-Hai

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

OBJECTIVES

Lyme disease is the most common tick-borne disease. People seek health information on Lyme disease from YouTubeTM videos. In this study, we investigated if the contents of Lyme disease-related YouTubeTM videos varied by their sources.

METHODS

Most viewed English YouTubeTM videos (n = 100) were identified and manually coded for contents and sources.

RESULTS

Within the sample, 40 videos were consumer-generated, 31 were internet-based news, 16 were professional, and 13 were TV news. Compared with consumer-generated videos, TV news videos were more likely to mention celebrities (odds ratio [OR], 10.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13-52.58), prevention of Lyme disease through wearing protective clothing (OR, 5.63; 95% CI, 1.23-25.76), and spraying insecticides (OR, 7.71; 95% CI, 1.52-39.05).

CONCLUSION

A majority of the most popular Lyme disease-related YouTube TM videos were not created by public health professionals. Responsible reporting and creative video-making facilitate Lyme disease education. Partnership with YouTubeTM celebrities to co-develop educational videos may be a future direction.

Для цитирования: Basch Corey H, Mullican Lindsay A, Boone Kwanza D, Yin Jingjing, Berdnik Alyssa, Eremeeva Marina E, Fung Isaac Chun-Hai. Lyme Disease and YouTube TM: A Cross-Sectional Study of Video Contents.. Osong public health and research perspectives. 2017. DOI: 10.24171/j.phrp.2017.8.4.10.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.