International ophthalmology · 2024
Evaluating the quality and reliability of YouTube videos on myopia: a video content analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Kayabaşı Mustafa, Köksaldı Seher, Durmaz Engin Ceren
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the quality and reliability of YouTube videos as an educational resource about myopia.
METHODS: The videos were identified by searching YouTube with the keywords 'myopia' and 'nearsightedness', using the website's default search settings. The number of views, likes, dislikes, view ratio, source of the upload, country of origin, video type, and described treatment techniques were assessed. Each video was evaluated using the DISCERN, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP), Health On the Net Code of Conduct Certification (HONcode), and the Global Quality Score (GQS) scales.
RESULTS: A total of 112 videos were included. The classification of videos by source indicated that the top three contributors were health channels (30 videos [26.8%]), physicians (24 videos [21.4%]), and academic centers (19 videos [16.9%]). Most of these videos originated from the United States (74 videos [66.1%]) and focused on the pathophysiology (n = 89, 79.4%) and the treatment (n = 77, 68.7%) of myopia. Statistical comparisons among the groups of video sources showed no significant difference in the mean DISCERN score (p = 0.102). However, significant differences were noted in the JAMA (p = 0.011), GQS (p = 0.009), HONcode (p = 0.011), and EQIP (p = 0.002) scores.
CONCLUSIONS: This study underscored the variability in the quality and reliability of YouTube videos related to myopia, with most content ranging from 'weak to moderate' quality based on the DISCERN and GQS scales, yet appearing to be 'excellent' according to the HONcode and EQIP scales. Videos uploaded by physicians generally exhibited higher standards, highlighting the importance of expert involvement in online health information dissemination. Given the potential risks of accessing incorrect medical data that can affect the decision-making processes of patients, caution should be exercised when using online content as a source of information.
METHODS: The videos were identified by searching YouTube with the keywords 'myopia' and 'nearsightedness', using the website's default search settings. The number of views, likes, dislikes, view ratio, source of the upload, country of origin, video type, and described treatment techniques were assessed. Each video was evaluated using the DISCERN, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP), Health On the Net Code of Conduct Certification (HONcode), and the Global Quality Score (GQS) scales.
RESULTS: A total of 112 videos were included. The classification of videos by source indicated that the top three contributors were health channels (30 videos [26.8%]), physicians (24 videos [21.4%]), and academic centers (19 videos [16.9%]). Most of these videos originated from the United States (74 videos [66.1%]) and focused on the pathophysiology (n = 89, 79.4%) and the treatment (n = 77, 68.7%) of myopia. Statistical comparisons among the groups of video sources showed no significant difference in the mean DISCERN score (p = 0.102). However, significant differences were noted in the JAMA (p = 0.011), GQS (p = 0.009), HONcode (p = 0.011), and EQIP (p = 0.002) scores.
CONCLUSIONS: This study underscored the variability in the quality and reliability of YouTube videos related to myopia, with most content ranging from 'weak to moderate' quality based on the DISCERN and GQS scales, yet appearing to be 'excellent' according to the HONcode and EQIP scales. Videos uploaded by physicians generally exhibited higher standards, highlighting the importance of expert involvement in online health information dissemination. Given the potential risks of accessing incorrect medical data that can affect the decision-making processes of patients, caution should be exercised when using online content as a source of information.