Is YouTube a Reliable Source of Information in Chondrosarcomas?
Abstract
Background: YouTube, a widely popular video platform, is inviting due to its easy access, and the quality and reliability of the information are not questioned or monitored, allowing non-medical individuals to share medical information. Our aim is to examine the reliability, validity, and comprehensiveness of English videos available on YouTube regarding chondrosarcoma.
Methods: In June 2024, a search for the term “chondrosarcoma” on YouTube was performed, and the top 50 most viewed videos ranked by relevance were evaluated. Videos were evaluated using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) criteria and modified DISCERN criteria for YouTube. The coverage score regarding the diagnosis and treatment of chondrosarcoma in these videos was also evaluated.
Results: The mean JAMA score was 1.32±1.11, modified DISCERN score was 2.18±1.02, and coverage score was 5.43±2.97. A moderate positive significant correlation was found between the JAMA and coverage scores (r=0.376, p=0.007), as well as between DISCERN and coverage scores (r=0.356, p=0.011) and between JAMA and DISCERN (r=0.539, p<0.001). Among the 50 videos examined, 26 were published by physicians, yet only 2 videos scored 4 points on the JAMA scoring. The mean coverage score for the 50 videos, rated out of 20 points, was only 5.43. No significant effect of whether the publisher was a physician on JAMA, DISCERN and coverage scores was found (p = 0.233, p = 0.690 and p = 1.000, respectively)
Conclusions: English YouTube videos on chondrosarcoma fall below the ethical and quality standards needed. We believe that the observation of these low scores, especially from a predominantly physician publisher population, warrants particular attention.
Keywords
References
- Chow WA. Chondrosarcoma: biology, genetics, and epigenetics. F1000Res. 2018;7:F1000 Faculty Rev-1826 Wang M, Song Y, Liu S, Sun W. Effect of surgery and radiotherapy on overall survival in patients with chondrosarcoma: A SEER-based study. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2022;30(1):10225536221086320.
- Gelderblom H, Hogendoorn PCW, Dijkstra SD, van Rijswijk CS, Krol AD, Taminiau AHM, et al. The clinical approach towards chondrosarcoma. Oncologist. 2008;13(3):320–9.
- Zhao Y, Zhang J. Consumer health information seeking in social media: a literature review. Health Info Libr J. 2017;34(4):268-283.
- Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK. Healthcare information on YouTube: A systematic review. Health Informatics J. 2015;21(3):173-94.
- Loeb S, Reines K, Abu-Salha Y, French W, Butaney M, Macaluso JN Jr, et al. Quality of Bladder Cancer Information on YouTube. Eur Urol. 2021;79(1):56-59.
- Loeb S, Sengupta S, Butaney M, Macaluso JN Jr, Czarniecki SW, Robbins R, et al. Dissemination of Misinformative and Biased Information about Prostate Cancer on YouTube. Eur Urol. 2019;75(4):564-567.
- Kim JH, Oh KH, Shin HY, Jun JK. How cancer patients get fake cancer information: From TV to YouTube, a qualitative study focusing on fenbendazole scandle. Front Oncol. 2022;12:942045.
- Shewale R. YouTube Statistics For 2024 (Users, Facts & More). 2024. Available at: https://www.demandsage.com/youtube-stats/#:~:-text=As%20of%202024%2C%20YouTube%20is,in%20the%20world%20access%20YouTube. Accessed 15.10.2024.
- Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, Controlling, and Assuring the Quality of Medical Information on the Internet: CaveantLector et Viewor—Letthe Reader and Viewer Beware. JAMA. 1997;277(15):1244–5.
- Güngörmüş Z, Güngörmüş M. Ağız-Diş Sağlığı İle İlgili Türkçe Web Sayfalarının Kalitesinin Değerlendirilmesi: Ön Çalışma. SSSJournal. 2018;20:2631-4.