Quality, reliability, and content assessment of YouTube™ videos associated with aphasia

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 5, 870 - 875, 28.09.2023

İbrahim Can Yaşa , Gözde Malkoç

https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1289594

Öz

Aims: Health-related videos on YouTube make it easy to share information on diseases and address a wide audience. However, there is doubt among specialists about their reliability, quality, and whether they contain correct information. The present study aimed to evaluate the quality of the information provided by searching for “aphasia” on YouTube™.
Methods: The results of the YouTube™ search were examined using the keywords “aphasia, Broca, Wernicke, conductive type, transcortical, anomic”. A total of 100 videos were identified, containing at least one of the keywords, relevant to the context, having at least 1000 views, published after 2010, in the English language, and shorter than 60 minutes. Modified DISCERN, Global Quality Score (GQS), Video Information and Quality Index (VIQI), and the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA), rating, viewer interaction, and meta data were used for evaluating the videos. The scores of the scales indicated by The Kruskal-Wallis H Test were compared between the groups according to the video source (news agency, healthcare personnel/specialist, other people). The data were analyzed with Dunn’s Test as a post-hoc test. Relational analyses and Spearman’s RHO Correlation were used for statistical analyzes. The significance level was taken as p<0.05
Results: A total of 59 videos were taken for assessment, 34% of the videos were uploaded by news agencies, 52.5% by healthcare institutions/specialists, and 13.5% by laypeople. Significant differences were detected between GQS scores (χ2=8.66, p=0.01) and VIQI (χ2=9.87, p=0.00) according to the video sources. Cohen Kappa scores indicating inter-observer agreement were 0.887. The average DISCERN score was 3.74, the VIQI score was 3.64 and GQS score was 3.67 and the JAMA score was 2.59.
Conclusion: The videos about aphasia on YouTube™ were determined to have moderate scores in terms of quality, information accuracy, and reliability. Videos uploaded by healthcare professionals/specialists have higher quality and information accuracy. Especially the news agencies with the highest ratings should be sensitive about publishing accurate information.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Aphasia, online video, internet, health, YouTube™

Kaynakça

• Drozd B, Couvillon E, Suarez A. Medical YouTube™ videos and methods of assessment:literature review. JMIR Med Educ. 2018;4:e8527.
• YouTube™.Available from:https://www.YouTube.com/yt/press/statistics.html [Access date:20.04.2023]
• Demand Sage. Ruby D. (2023, April 13). Available from:https://www.demandsage.com/youtube-stats/
• Haslam K, Doucette H, Hachey S, et al. YouTube™ videos as health decision aids for the public:an integrative review. Can J Dent Hyg. 2019;53:53–66.
• Eysenbach G. Infodemiology and infoveillance tracking online health information and cyberbehavior for public health. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40:154–8.
• Kollia B, Kamowski-Shakibai MT, Basch CH, et al. Sources and content of popular online videos about autism spectrum disorders. Health Promot Int. 2017;7:238.
• Bellon-Harn ML, Manchaiah V, Morris LR. A crosssectional descriptive analysis of portrayal of autism spectrum disorders in YouTube™ videos:A short report. Autism. 2019;24:263-8.
• Ellis C, Dismuke C, Edwards KK. Longitudinal trends in aphasia in the United States. NeuroRehabilitation. 2010;27:327–33.
• Simmons-Mackie N, Cherney LR. Aphasia in North America:highlights of a white paper. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018;99:e117.
• Greenberg L, D'Andrea G, Lorence D. Setting the public agenda for online health search:a white paper and action agenda. J Med Internet Res. 2004;6:e18.
• Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, et al. Healthcare information on YouTube™:A systematic review. J Health Inform. 2015;21:173–94.
• Freeman B. New media and tobacco control. Tob Control. 2012;21:139-44.
• Fernandez-Luque L, Karlsen R, Melton GB. HealthTrust:a social network approach for retrieving online health videos. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14:e22.
• Mueller SM, Jungo P, Cajacob L, Schwegler S, Itin P, Brandt O. The absence of evidence is evidence of non-sense:cross-sectional study on the quality of psoriasis-related videos on YouTube™ and their reception by health seekers. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21:e11935.
• Ardila A. Aphasia Handbook. Miami: FL Florida International University; 2014.
• Hassona Y, Taimeh D, Marahleh A, Scully C. YouTube™ as a source of information on mouth (oral) cancer. Oral Dis. 2016;22:202–8.
• Şahin E, Vezirhüyük M. A quality analysis of robotic-assisted knee replacement surgery videos on Youtube. J Health Sci Med. 2023;6(2), 319-24.
• Yapıcı O, Gülseren YD. Quality, reliability and content evaluation of YouTube videos associated monkeypox Youtube. J Health Sci Med. 2023;6(2), 364-7.
• Küçük B, Sırakaya E. An analysis of YouTube videos as educational resources for patients about refractive surgery. Cornea. 2020;39(4):491-4.
• Shao G. Understanding the appeal of user‐generated media:a uses and gratification perspective. Internet Res. 2009
• Bilir H, Yılancı H. Does YouTube™ give us accurate information about bruxism?. J Health Sci Med. 2023;6:380-384.
• Topps D, Helmer J, Ellaway R. YouTube as a platform for publishing clinical skills training videos. Acad Med. 2013;88(2):192-197.