Digital health · 2024
YouTube as a source of information for cryptococcal infection: A cross-sectional study.
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.
Liao Kaijun, Feng Zhiqiang, Lu Dongli, Xia Jianping, Wu Zhaochun, Jiang Zhenghua, Chen Kun, Qiu Hongqiang
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Immunocompromised individuals, particularly HIV patients, worldwide are at risk from cryptococcal infection. There are a number of videos of cryptococcal infection and more and more individuals may search these videos, but the quality of videos on YouTube is unclear. This study set out to assess the content and quality of YouTube videos regarding cryptococcal infection.
METHODS: The keywords "Cryptococcus," "Cryptococcosis" and "Cryptococcal infection" were searched on YouTube. The videos were evaluated and graded by two impartial raters. A 14-point content score was used to categorize videos as bad, good or exceptional. The reliability and quality were evaluated utilizing the DISCERN instrument and a 5-point global quality score. Videos were then divided into groups based on uploading sources and content types.
RESULTS: A total of 46 videos were located, and the ratings provided by the two raters were identical. Our scoring algorithm determined that 54.3% (n = 25), 32.6% (n = 15) and 13.0% (n = 6) of the videos were poor, decent and exceptional, respectively. Regarding quality, no difference was identified between the various video categories. The global quality scale, number of views, days posted, content score and DISCERN showed a significant positive relationship.
CONCLUSIONS: Professional individuals or healthcare organizations should be encouraged to submit high-quality videos for the expanding internet population, as only a small proportion of available videos had exceptional quality.
METHODS: The keywords "Cryptococcus," "Cryptococcosis" and "Cryptococcal infection" were searched on YouTube. The videos were evaluated and graded by two impartial raters. A 14-point content score was used to categorize videos as bad, good or exceptional. The reliability and quality were evaluated utilizing the DISCERN instrument and a 5-point global quality score. Videos were then divided into groups based on uploading sources and content types.
RESULTS: A total of 46 videos were located, and the ratings provided by the two raters were identical. Our scoring algorithm determined that 54.3% (n = 25), 32.6% (n = 15) and 13.0% (n = 6) of the videos were poor, decent and exceptional, respectively. Regarding quality, no difference was identified between the various video categories. The global quality scale, number of views, days posted, content score and DISCERN showed a significant positive relationship.
CONCLUSIONS: Professional individuals or healthcare organizations should be encouraged to submit high-quality videos for the expanding internet population, as only a small proportion of available videos had exceptional quality.