Analysis of the Accuracy and Quality of Information in YouTube Videos on Female Urethroplasty

Year 2025, Volume: 32 Issue: 1, 65 - 71, 27.03.2025

Alper Şimşek , Aykut Başer , Kürşat Küçüker , Yusuf Özlülerden , Sinan Çelen , Güngör Bingöl

Abstract

Objective: Bladder outlet obstruction is a relatively rare problem in women. Experience in diagnosing and managing female urethral stricture disease is limited. The literature emphasizes that urethral dilatation is usually not successful, but surgical reconstruction is successful. Physicians and patients want to obtain information from social media because surgery cannot be performed in every center. With this study, we aimed to make an integrative review of the quality of the information in YouTube videos in the field of female urethroplasty.
Material and Method: Using the keyword female urethroplasty, we searched https://www.youtube.com/ for the last 5 years. Video features, quality, and reliability analysis were performed. The reliability and quality of the medical information in the videos were determined by the JAMA (Journal of American Medical Association) scoring system, the Global Quality Score (GQS), and the DISCERN questionnaire.
Results: 39 videos out of a total of 49 were included in the study. India was the country with the most video uploads (43.6%). There was no significant correlation between DISCERN score and the number of views and video comment count (rho;-0.101 p=0.539, rho;0.018 p=0.924, respectively). The DISCERN score, GQS, and JAMA scores of videos from Academic institutions or societies were found to be higher than personal videos (p=0.037, p=0.037, p=0.001, respectively).
Conclusion: Although there are limited videos about female urethroplasty on YouTube, the accuracy and reliability of the medical information in the most watched videos are low.

Keywords

Female urethroplasty, Social media, Urethroplasty, YouTube

References

• 1. Ozlulerden Y, Celen S, Zumrutbas AE, et al. Female buccal mucosa graft urethroplasty: A new modified ventral onlay “AZ” technique. International Urogynecology Journal 2020;31:2543-2550.
• 2. Spilotros M, Malde S, Solomon E, et al. Female urethral stricture: A contemporary series. World Journal of Urology 2017;35:991-995.
• 3. West C, Lawrence A. Female urethroplasty: Contemporary thinking. World Journal of Urology 2019;37:619-629.
• 4. Elliott CS. Female urethral stricture management: The initial experience of an female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery-trained urologist. Urogynecology 2021;27(4):e516-e520.
• 5. Waterloos M, Verla W. Female urethroplasty: A practical guide emphasizing diagnosis and surgical treatment of female urethral stricture disease. BioMed Research International 2019;2019(1): p. 6715257.
• 6. Tonsaker T, Bartlett G, Trpkov C. Health information on the Internet: Gold mine or minefield? Canadian Family Physician 2014;60(5):407-408.
• 7. Loeb S, Carrick T, Frey C, et al. Increasing social media use in urology: 2017 American Urological Association Survey. European Urology Focus 2020;6(3):605-608.
• 8. Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis—a wakeup call? The Journal of Rheumatology 2012;39(5):899-903.
• 9. Fast AM, Deibert CM, Hruby GW, et al. Evaluating the quality of Internet health resources in pediatric urology. Journal of Pediatric Urology 2013;9(2):151-156.
• 10. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor--Let the reader and viewer beware. Jama 1997;277(15):1244-1245.
• 11. Erdem MN, Karaca S. Evaluating the accuracy and quality of the information in kyphosis videos shared on YouTube. Spine 2018;43(22):E1334-E1339.
• 12. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, et al. DISCERN: An instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health 1999;53(2):105-111.
• 13. Derakhshan A, Lee L, Bhama P, et al. Assessing the educational quality of ‘YouTube’videos for facelifts. American Journal of Otolaryngology 2019;40(2):156-159.
• 14. Rivas JG, Socarras MR, Patruno G, et al. Perceived role of social media in urologic knowledge acquisition among young urologists: A European Survey. European Urology Focus 2018;4(5):768-773.
• 15. Toksoz A, Duran MB. Analysis of videos about vesicoureteral reflux on YouTube. Journal of Pediatric Urology 2021;17(6):858. e1-858. e6.
• 16. Şaşmaz M, Akça A. Reliability of trauma management videos on YouTube and their compliance with ATLS® guideline. European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery 2018;44:753-757.
• 17. Roberts B, Kobritz M, Nofi C, et al. Social Media, Misinformation, and Online Patient Education in Emergency General Surgical Procedures. Journal of Surgical Research 2023;287:16-23.
• 18. Morra S, Collà Ruvolo C, Napolitano L, et al. YouTubeTM as a source of information on bladder pain syndrome: A contemporary analysis. Neurourology and Urodynamics 2022;41(1):237-245.
• 19. Sahin Y, Paslanmaz F, Ulus I, et al. Quality and content analysis of female urethroplasty videos on YouTube. LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms 2023;15(1):24-30.
• 20. Ku S, Balasubramanian A, Yu J, et al. A systematic evaluation of youtube as an information source for male infertility. International Journal of Impotence Research 2021;33(6):611-615.
• 21. Baydilli N, Selvi I. Is social media reliable as a source of information on Peyronie’s disease treatment? International Journal of Impotence Research 2022;34(3):295-301.
• 22. Serinken M, Eken C, Erdemir F, et al. The reliability of national videos related to the kidney stones on YouTube. Turkish Journal of Urology 2016;42(1):7.
• 23. Dogan C, Akgul HM, Sahin MF, et al. Reliability and accuracy of varicocoele videos in YouTube. JPMA The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association 2022;72(12):2427-2431.