BMC oral health · 2026
Educational quality of YouTube content on healthcare waste management relevant to dentistry: a cross-sectional study.
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.
Fagundes Filipe Lima Goetz, da Cunha Daniel Costa Magalhães, Câmara João Victor Frazão, da Conceição Aléxia Caroline Leandro, Varela Victor de Macedo, Pereira Gisele Damiana da Silveira
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: YouTube has become a major source of educational content in healthcare, including topics related to dentistry and public health. However, the accuracy and educational reliability of videos addressing healthcare waste management relevant to dental practice remain uncertain. Therefore, the aim of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate the educational quality, credibility, and reliability of YouTube videos addressing healthcare waste management with relevance to dental practice, using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, and the modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) instrument. Additionally, the influence of video source type and the correlation among the evaluation instruments were investigated.
METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted in June 2025 using Portuguese search terms related to healthcare waste management, including "Resíduos de Serviço de Saúde," "Resíduos Hospitalares," and "Resíduos Odontológicos," to identify videos relevant to dental practice. A total of 180 YouTube videos were initially screened. After duplicate removal and application of inclusion criteria, 47 videos were included for final analysis. Two independent and calibrated reviewers assessed all videos using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria and modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) instrument. To account for the Brazilian regulatory context, particularly Resolution RDC No. 222/2018, the GQS, JAMA benchmark criteria, and mDISCERN were applied as contextually adapted applications of the original instruments, using study-specific operational definitions to guide the interpretation of selected criteria. These contextual adaptations preserved the general structure and scoring ranges of the instruments but may have altered the interpretation of some underlying constructs. Because these adaptations have not undergone independent psychometric validation, they should not be considered validated modifications of the original instruments, and the findings should be interpreted within the specific methodological context of the present study. Inter-rater reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha. Descriptive analyses were performed, followed by ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests to compare scores according to source type (academic institutions, organizations, healthcare professionals, and other users). Spearman's correlation test assessed associations among evaluation instruments.
RESULTS: Excellent inter-rater agreement was observed (ICC = 0.946; 95% CI: 0.913-0.967; Cronbach's alpha = 0.913). Mean scores obtained using the contextually adapted applications indicated high quality of the assessed educational content according to the GQS (4.19 ± 0.78), moderate credibility/transparency (JAMA: 2.43 ± 1.06), and moderate reliability (mDISCERN: 2.50 ± 0.90). No statistically significant differences were identified among source types for any scale (p > 0.05). A significant positive correlation was found between JAMA and mDISCERN scores (ρ = 0.502; p < 0.001), indicating an association between these scores within the contextually adapted measurement framework. No significant correlations were observed between GQS and the other instruments.
CONCLUSIONS: The 47 YouTube videos analyzed in the present study demonstrated satisfactory quality of the assessed educational content but only moderate credibility and reliability, based on the contextually adapted applications of the GQS, JAMA benchmark criteria, and mDISCERN. Because the contextual operational definitions used for these instruments have not undergone independent psychometric validation, the results should be interpreted within the methodological framework adopted in this study. No statistically significant differences in scores were detected among the represented source categories. However, a positive association was observed between the scores obtained using the contextually adapted JAMA and mDISCERN applications, whereas GQS scores were not significantly associated with either instrument. These findings underscore the importance of critically evaluating online health-related content using assessment approaches that address different dimensions of quality. The results describe the characteristics of the videos retrieved under the specified search strategy during the June 2025 data collection period and should not be generalized to all YouTube content or interpreted as evidence of educational effectiveness, learning outcomes, professional competence, or changes in healthcare waste management practices. Furthermore, whether the characteristics identified in these videos translate into measurable educational benefits or contribute to learning and professional training remains to be determined through direct evaluation in future educational studies.
METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted in June 2025 using Portuguese search terms related to healthcare waste management, including "Resíduos de Serviço de Saúde," "Resíduos Hospitalares," and "Resíduos Odontológicos," to identify videos relevant to dental practice. A total of 180 YouTube videos were initially screened. After duplicate removal and application of inclusion criteria, 47 videos were included for final analysis. Two independent and calibrated reviewers assessed all videos using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria and modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) instrument. To account for the Brazilian regulatory context, particularly Resolution RDC No. 222/2018, the GQS, JAMA benchmark criteria, and mDISCERN were applied as contextually adapted applications of the original instruments, using study-specific operational definitions to guide the interpretation of selected criteria. These contextual adaptations preserved the general structure and scoring ranges of the instruments but may have altered the interpretation of some underlying constructs. Because these adaptations have not undergone independent psychometric validation, they should not be considered validated modifications of the original instruments, and the findings should be interpreted within the specific methodological context of the present study. Inter-rater reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha. Descriptive analyses were performed, followed by ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests to compare scores according to source type (academic institutions, organizations, healthcare professionals, and other users). Spearman's correlation test assessed associations among evaluation instruments.
RESULTS: Excellent inter-rater agreement was observed (ICC = 0.946; 95% CI: 0.913-0.967; Cronbach's alpha = 0.913). Mean scores obtained using the contextually adapted applications indicated high quality of the assessed educational content according to the GQS (4.19 ± 0.78), moderate credibility/transparency (JAMA: 2.43 ± 1.06), and moderate reliability (mDISCERN: 2.50 ± 0.90). No statistically significant differences were identified among source types for any scale (p > 0.05). A significant positive correlation was found between JAMA and mDISCERN scores (ρ = 0.502; p < 0.001), indicating an association between these scores within the contextually adapted measurement framework. No significant correlations were observed between GQS and the other instruments.
CONCLUSIONS: The 47 YouTube videos analyzed in the present study demonstrated satisfactory quality of the assessed educational content but only moderate credibility and reliability, based on the contextually adapted applications of the GQS, JAMA benchmark criteria, and mDISCERN. Because the contextual operational definitions used for these instruments have not undergone independent psychometric validation, the results should be interpreted within the methodological framework adopted in this study. No statistically significant differences in scores were detected among the represented source categories. However, a positive association was observed between the scores obtained using the contextually adapted JAMA and mDISCERN applications, whereas GQS scores were not significantly associated with either instrument. These findings underscore the importance of critically evaluating online health-related content using assessment approaches that address different dimensions of quality. The results describe the characteristics of the videos retrieved under the specified search strategy during the June 2025 data collection period and should not be generalized to all YouTube content or interpreted as evidence of educational effectiveness, learning outcomes, professional competence, or changes in healthcare waste management practices. Furthermore, whether the characteristics identified in these videos translate into measurable educational benefits or contribute to learning and professional training remains to be determined through direct evaluation in future educational studies.