Content Analysis of Exercise Videos Related to Hemiplegia Published On Youtube

Öz

Purpose: To analyze the content of YouTube hemiplegia exercise videos and determine the quality and reliability of these videos. Methods: Videos were searched using the search terms “hemiplegia rehabilitation,” “hemiplegia exercises,” and “hemiplegia physiotherapy” on the YouTube search engine. Video quality and reliability were evaluated using Global Quality Score (GQS) and Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmark criteria. Descriptive features of the videos were recorded. Results: Data from 37 videos were analyzed. The median JAMA score of the videos was 2 and the median GQS was 3. According to GQS, 56.7% of videos were moderate-high quality and 43.2% were low quality. There was no difference between low-quality and moderate-high quality videos in terms of number of views, view rate, number of likes and dislikes, and video power index (p>0.05). Conclusion and Suggestions: The quality of YouTube hemiplegia exercise videos is moderate and the reliability is poor. The lack of difference between low and moderate-high quality videos in terms of viewing metrics, viewer engagement, and video popularity may lead to incorrect exercise practices and put patients' health at risk.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• JAMA
• Quality
• Reliability
• Stroke

Youtube Hemipleji Egzersiz Videolarının İçeriklerinin İncelenmesi

Öz

Amaç: YouTube'daki hemipleji egzersiz videolarının içeriğini analiz etmek ve bu videoların kalitesini ve güvenilirliğini belirlemektir. Yöntem: Videolar, YouTube arama motorunda " hemiplegia rehabilitation", "hemiplegia exercises" ve " hemiplegia physiotherapy" arama terimleri kullanılarak arandı. Video kalitesi ve güvenilirliği, Küresel Kalite Puanı (KKS) ve Amerikan Tabipler Birliği Dergisi (ATBD) ölçüt kriterleri kullanılarak değerlendirildi. Videoların tanımlayıcı özellikleri kaydedildi. Bulgular: 37 videodan elde edilen veriler analiz edildi. Videoların ortanca ATBD puanı 2 ve ortanca KKS puanı 3 olarak bulundu. KKS'ye göre videoların %56,7'si orta-yüksek kalitede, %43,2'si ise düşük kalitedeydi. Düşük kaliteli ve orta-yüksek kaliteli videolar arasında görüntülenme sayısı, görüntülenme oranı, beğenme- beğenmeme sayısı ve video güç indeksi açısından fark bulunmadı (p>0,05). Sonuç ve Öneriler: YouTube'daki hemipleji egzersiz videolarının kalitesi orta düzeydedir ve güvenilirliği düşüktür. İzlenme oranları, izleyici etkileşimi ve video popülerliği açısından düşük ve orta-yüksek kaliteli videolar arasında fark olmaması, yanlış egzersiz uygulamalarına yol açabilir ve hastaların sağlığını riske atabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• JAMA
• Kalite
• Güvenirlil
• İnme

Kaynakça

1. 1. Feigin, VL., Abate, M.D., Abate YH., et al,. (2024). Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990–2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. The Lancet Neurology, 23(10), 973-1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(24)00369-7
2. 2. Scott, C. A., Li, L., & Rothwell, P. M. (2022). Diverging temporal trends in stroke incidence in younger vs older people: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Neurology, 79(10), 1036–1048. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.1520
3. 3. Stinear, C. M., Lang, C. E., Zeiler, S., & Byblow, W. D. (2020). Advances and challenges in stroke rehabilitation. The Lancet Neurology, 19(4), 348–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30415-6
4. 4. Frontera, W. R., Silver, J. K., Rizzo, T. D., Jr., Abbas, J., & Smith, A. B. (2015). Essentials of physical medicine and rehabilitation: Musculoskeletal disorders, pain, and rehabilitation (3rd ed., pp. 864–869). Elsevier Saunders.
5. 5. Chan, L., Sandel, M. E., Jette, A. M., Appareddy, V., Bateman, J., Berke, G. M., . . . Smith, A. B. (2013). Does postacute care site matter? A longitudinal study assessing functional recovery after a stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 94(4), 622–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2012.09.033
6. 6. Mayo, N. E., Wood-Dauphinee, S., Cote, R., Gayton, D., Carlton, J., Dallaire, J., & Wood, A. M. (2000). There’s no place like home: An evaluation of early supported discharge for stroke. Stroke, 31(5), 1016–1023. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.31.5.1016
7. 7. World Health Organization. (2024, April 22). Rehabilitation. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/rehabilitation
8. 8. Global Media Insight. (2025, January 10). YouTube user statistics 2025. https://www.globalmediainsight.com/blog/youtube-users-statistics/

9. 9. Langford, A., & Loeb, S. (2019). Perceived patient-provider communication quality and sociodemographic factors associated with watching health-related videos on YouTube: A cross-sectional analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(5), Article e13512. https://doi.org/10.2196/13512
10. 10. Loeb, S., Sengupta, S., Butaney, M., Macaluso, J. N., Jr., Czarniecki, S. W., Robbins, R., Raheem, O. A., & Sautter, A. (2019). Dissemination of misinformative and biased information about prostate cancer on YouTube. European Urology, 75(4), 564–567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.056
11. 11. Szmuda, T., Alkhater, A., Albrahim, M., Almuammar, S., Alturki, A. Y., Özdemir, C., Ali, S., & Świerczyński, P. (2020). YouTube as a source of patient information for stroke: A content-quality and an audience engagement analysis. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases, 29(9), Article 105065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2020.105065
12. 12. Yasin, S., & Altunisik, E. (2023). Quality analysis of YouTube videos on mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases, 32(2), Article 106914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2022.106914
13. 13. Chang, M. C., & Park, D. (2021). YouTube as a source of patient information regarding exercises and compensated maneuvers for dysphagia. Healthcare, 9(8), Article 1084. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9081084
14. 14. Bernard, A., Langille, M., Hughes, S., Rose, C., Leddin, D., & van Zanten, S. V. (2007). A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. The American Journal of Gastroenterology, 102(9), 2070–2077. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01325.x
15. 15. Silberg, W. M., Lundberg, G. D., & Musacchio, R. A. (1997). Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the internet: Caveant lector et viewor—Let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 277(15), 1244–1245. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1997.03540390074039
16. 16. Erdem, M. N., & Karaca, S. (2018). Evaluating the accuracy and quality of the information in kyphosis videos shared on YouTube. Spine, 43(22), E1334–E1339. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002691
17. 17. Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
18. 18. Antheunis, M. L., Tates, K., & Nieboer, T. E. (2013). Patients’ and health professionals’ use of social media in health care: Motives, barriers and expectations. Patient Education and Counseling, 92(3), 426–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2013.06.020
19. 19. Haslam, K., Doucette, H., Hachey, S., MacIsaac, B., & Smith, B. (2019). YouTube videos as health decision aids for the public: An integrative review. Canadian Journal of Dental Hygiene, 53(1), 53–66.
20. 20. Kaymakoglu, M., Aksoy, T., Kolac, U. C., Guven, K., & Demirhan, M. (2024). Source-dependent quality variation in shoulder dislocation videos on YouTube. Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation, 6(3), Article 100921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100921
21. 21. Rodriguez, A. M. R., Blanco-Diaz, M., Lopez-Diaz, P., De la Fuente-Costa, M., Munoz-Hellin, E., & Ruano-Ravina, A. (2022). Quality analysis of YouTube videos presenting shoulder exercises after breast cancer surgery. Breast Care, 17(2), 188–198. https://doi.org/10.1159/000518265
22. 22. Ng, C. H., Lim, G. R. S., & Fong, W. (2020). Quality of English‐language videos on YouTube as a source of information on systemic lupus erythematosus. International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases, 23(12), 1636–1644. https://doi.org/10.1111/1756-185X.13852
23. 23. Szmuda, T., Alkhater, A., Albrahim, M., Almuammar, S., Alturki, A. Y., Özdemir, C., Ali, S., & Świerczyński, P. (2020). YouTube as a source of patient information for stroke: A content-quality and an audience engagement analysis. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases, 29(9), Article 105065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2020.105065
24. 24. Denham, A. M., Baker, A. L., & Spratt, N. J. (2020). YouTube as a resource for evaluating the unmet needs of caregivers of stroke survivors. Health Informatics Journal, 26(3), 1599–1616. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458219873538
25. 25. Assylbek, M.I., Zimba, O., Akyol, A., Yessirkepov, M., Kocyigit, B.F. (2025). YouTube as a source of information for stroke rehabilitation: a cross-sectional analysis of quality and reliability of videos. Rheumatology International, 45(4),1-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-025-05832-4