Quality Assessment of YouTube Videos on Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Content Analysis

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the quality, reliability, and educational value of YouTube videos related to transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB), an increasingly adopted diagnostic approach in urology. Method: This was a descriptive and analytical content analysis. In this study, a systematic YouTube search was conducted using predefined keywords. Videos were included if they were in English, 1–10 minutes in length, and featured audio narration. A total of 21 videos met the inclusion criteria. Video quality was assessed using the BAUS scoring system, the DISCERN instrument, and the Global Quality Score (GQS). Results: Among the analyzed videos, 28.6% were classified as reliable and 71.4% as unreliable. Reliable videos had significantly higher BAUS (p<0.001), DISCERN (p=0.014), and GQS (p<0.001) scores. No significant differences were observed in popularity metrics between groups. The majority of reliable videos were produced by universities or non-profit organizations, yet 68.8% of institution-based videos were still classified as unreliable. Conclusions: YouTube videos on transperineal prostate biopsy generally exhibited low educational quality and reliability. Institutional affiliation did not guarantee content quality. There is a pressing need for structured, evidence-based, and patient-centered educational video content. Healthcare professionals and institutions must take active responsibility in producing reliable digital resources for patient education.

Keywords

• Transperineal biopsy
• prostate cancer
• YouTube
• video quality
• patient education.

Transperineal Prostat Biyopsisi ile İlgili YouTube Videolarının Kalite Değerlendirmesi: Sistematik Bir İçerik Analizi

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, ürolojide giderek daha fazla tercih edilen bir tanı yöntemi olan transperineal prostat biyopsisi (TPB) ile ilgili YouTube videolarının içerik kalitesi, güvenilirliği ve eğitsel değeri değerlendirilmiştir. Yöntem: Araştırma tanımlayıcı ve analitik nitelikte bir içerik analizidir. Bu çalışmada, YouTube platformunda belirlenmiş anahtar kelimelerle sistematik arama yapılmıştır. İngilizce, 1–10 dakika aralığında ve sesli anlatıma sahip videolar dahil edilmiştir. Toplam 21 video değerlendirmeye alınmıştır. Video kalitesi BAUS puanlama sistemi, DISCERN aracı ve Global Quality Score (GQS) kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular: Videoların %28,6’sı güvenilir, %71,4’ü ise güvenilir olmayan içerik olarak sınıflandırılmıştır. Güvenilir videoların BAUS (p<0,001), DISCERN (p=0,014) ve GQS (p<0,001) puanları anlamlı şekilde daha yüksektir. Popülarite ölçütleri açısından gruplar arasında fark saptanmamıştır. Güvenilir videoların çoğu üniversite veya kar amacı gütmeyen kuruluşlara ait olsa da, bu kurumsal videoların %68,8’i yine de güvenilir bulunmamıştır. Sonuç: Transperineal prostat biyopsisi ile ilgili YouTube videoları genel olarak düşük eğitimsel kaliteye ve sınırlı güvenilirliğe sahiptir. Kurumsal kaynak olmak, içeriğin kaliteli olduğu anlamına gelmemektedir. Hasta eğitimi açısından yapılandırılmış, kanıta dayalı ve hasta odaklı videolara olan ihtiyaç açıktır. Sağlık profesyonelleri ve kurumları, dijital eğitim içerikleri üretme konusunda daha aktif sorumluluk almalıdır.

Keywords

• Transperineal biyopsi
• prostat kanseri
• YouTube
• video kalitesi
• hasta eğitimi.

References

1. 1. Rawla P. Epidemiology of Prostate Cancer. World J Oncol. 2019;10(2):63-89.,
2. 2. Bergengren O, Pekala KR, Matsoukas K, Fainberg J, Mungovan SF, Bratt O, et al. 2022 Update on Prostate Cancer Epidemiology and risk factors-a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2023;84(2):191-206.
3. 3. Ortner G, Tzanaki E. Transperineal prostate biopsy: the modern gold standard to prostate cancer diagnosis. 2021;47(Supp. 1):S19-S26.
4. 4. Ranasinghe W, Shapiro DD, Zhang M, Bathala T, Navone N, Thompson TC, et al. Optimizing the diagnosis and management of ductal prostate cancer. Nature Reviews Urology. 2021;18(6):337-58.
5. 5. Kotrotsios K, Douroumis K, Katsikatsos P, Fragkiadis E, Mitropoulos D. Prostate biopsy in patients without rectal access: a systematic review and proportional meta-analysis. Centr Eur J Urol. 2025;78(1):14.
6. 6. Hu J, Zhu A. Protocol of a multicentre randomised controlled trial assessing transperineal prostate biopsy to reduce infectious complications. BMJ Open. 2023;13(5):e071191.
7. 7. Hu JC, Assel M, Allaf ME, Ehdaie B, Vickers AJ, Cohen AJ, et al. Transperineal versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and systematic prostate biopsy to prevent infectious complications: the PREVENT Randomized Trial. Eur Urol. 2024;86(1):61-8.
8. 8. Stoumpos AI, Kitsios F. Digital transformation in healthcare: technology acceptance and its applications. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(4):3407.

9. 9. Ștefan A-M, Rusu N-R, Ovreiu E, Ciuc M. Empowering healthcare: a comprehensive guide to implementing a robust medical information system—components, benefits, objectives, evaluation criteria, and seamless deployment strategies. Appl Syst Innov. 2024;7(3):51.
10. 10. Patel RD, Dave P, Loloi J, Freeman S, Feiertag N, Babar M, et al. Gender Bias in YouTube videos describing common urology conditions. Urology. 2022;169:256-66.
11. 11. Curran V, Simmons K, Matthews L, Fleet L, Gustafson DL, Fairbridge NA, et al. YouTube as an educational resource in medical education: a scoping review. Med Sci Educ. 2020;30(4):1775-82.
12. 12. Osman W, Mohamed F, Elhassan M, Shoufan A. Is YouTube a reliable source of health-related information? A systematic review. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):382.
13. 13. Nath A, Datta A. Assessment of the usefulness and reliability of YouTube videos on Postmortem procedures. Cureus. 2025;17(2):e79412.
14. 14. Mohamed F, Shoufan A. Users’ experience with health-related content on YouTube: an exploratory study. BMC Public Health. 2024;24(1):86.
15. 15. 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):564-7.
16. 16. Basch CH, Menafro A, Mongiovi J, Hillyer GC, Basch CE. A Content Analysis of YouTube™ videos related to Prostate Cancer. Am J Men's Health. 2017;11(1):154-7.
17. 17. Batur AF, Altintas E, Gül M. Evaluation of YouTube videos on primary bladder pain syndrome. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33(5):1251-8.
18. 18. Esen E, Aslan M, Sonbahar B, Kerimoğlu RS. YouTube English videos as a source of information on breast self-examination. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;173(3):629-35.
19. 19. Barahona-Correa JE, Rueda-Ortiz C, Muñoz O, García Á A, Fernández-Ávila DG. YouTube® as a source of information for Spanish-speaking patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Reumatol Clin. 2023;19(10):571-8.
20. 20. Tang K, Azhar U, Babar M, Ahmed A, Oh A, Day W, et al. Assessing the quality of YouTube videos on Adhesive Capsulitis. Cureus. 2022;14(7):e27406.
21. 21. Jain N, Abboudi H, Kalic A, Gill F, Al-Hasani H. YouTube as a source of patient information for transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate. Clin Radiol. 2019;74(1):79.e11-79.e14.
22. 22. Śledzińska P, Bebyn MG, Furtak J. Quality of YouTube videos on Meningioma treatment using the DISCERN instrument. World Neurosurg. 2021;153:e179-86.
23. 23. Etzel CM, Bokshan SL, Forster TA, Owens BD. A quality assessment of YouTube content on shoulder instability. Phys Sportsmed. 2022;50(4):289-94.
24. 24. Çapkınoğlu E, İflazoğlu N. Analysis of YouTube videos on rectal cancer surgery as educational resources. Turkish J Colorectal Dis. 2023;33(1):7-12.
25. 25. Ghalavand H, Panahi S, Nouri M. Opportunities and challenges of social media for oral health literacy improvement: a qualitative investigation based on Iranian dentists' perspectives. BMC Health Serv Res. 2025;25(1):673.
26. 26. Fitzpatrick PJ. Improving health literacy using the power of digital communications to achieve better health outcomes for patients and practitioners. Front Digit Health. 2023;5:1264780.
27. 27. Sharkiya SH. Quality communication can improve patient-centred health outcomes among older patients: a rapid review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(1):886.
28. 28. Erkin Y, Hanci V, Ozduran E. Evaluation of the reliability and quality of YouTube videos as a source of information for transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. PeerJ. 2023;11:e15412.
29. 29. Güdeloğlu A, Şentürk AB, Farahvash EA, Ergen A, Sözen S, Bilen CY. A technical modification to reduce potential contamination in Transperineal Prostate Fusion Biopsy. Bull Urooncol. 2020;19(2):60-3.
30. 30. Çelik S, Kızılay F, Yörükoğlu K, Özen H, Akdoğan B, İzol V, et al. Are the recommended criteria for clinically insignificant prostate cancer applicable to 12-core prostate biopsy scheme? A multicentre study of urooncology association, Turkey. Bull Urooncol. 2021;20(1):19-25.
31. 31. Cuypers M, Lamers RED, Cornel EB, van de Poll-Franse LV, de Vries M, Kil PJM. The impact of prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment decision-making on health-related quality of life before treatment onset. Supportive Care Cancer. 2018;26(4):1297-304.