A qualitative analysis of methotrexate self-injection education videos on YouTube

Abstract

The aim of this study is to identify and evaluate the quality of videos for patients available on YouTube for learning to self-administer subcutaneous methotrexate. Using the search term "Methotrexate injection," two clinical reviewers analyzed the first 60 videos on YouTube. Source and search rank of video, audience interaction, video duration, and time since video was uploaded on YouTube were recorded. Videos were classified as useful, misleading, or a personal patient view. Videos were rated for reliability, comprehensiveness, and global quality scale (GQS). Reasons for misleading videos were documented, and patient videos were documented as being either positive or negative towards methotrexate (MTX) injection. Fifty-one English videos overlapped between the two geographic locations; 10 videos were classified as useful (19.6 %), 14 misleading (27.5 %), and 27 personal patient view (52.9 %). Total views of videos were 161,028: 19.2 % useful, 72.8 % patient, and 8.0 % misleading. Mean GQS: 4.2 (±1.0) useful, 1.6 (±1.1) misleading, and 2.0 (±0.9) for patient videos (p < 0.0001). Mean reliability: 3.3 (±0.6) useful, 0.9 (±1.2) misleading, and 1.0 (±0.7) for patient videos (p < 0.0001). Comprehensiveness: 2.2 (±1.9) useful, 0.1 (±0.3) misleading, and 1.5 (±1.5) for patient view videos (p = 0.0027). This study demonstrates a minority of videos are useful for teaching MTX injection. Further, video quality does not correlate with video views. While web video may be an additional educational tool available, clinicians need to be familiar with specific resources to help guide and educate their patients to ensure best outcomes.

YouTube and the single-rod contraceptive implant: a content analysis

“…Singh et al and Rittenberg et al used a modified five-point DISCERN tool to assess rheumatoid arthritis and methotrexate injection videos on YouTube 23 24. Originally developed by Charnock and colleagues, the DISCERN tool enables evaluation of written health information 25.…”

“…We also rated the quality of each video using the global quality scale. Bernard and colleagues originally published this scale and it has been used subsequently in other literature evaluating medical information on YouTube 23 24 26 27…”

German YouTube™ videos as a source of information on cutaneous melanoma: a critical appraisal

“…In brief, we searched YouTube TM (www.youtube.com) in June 2019 using German melanoma-related keywords and included the first three pages of results. 5,6 Eligible videos had to contain information referring to cutaneous melanoma, be accessible for free and be provided in German. Videos were excluded if they were commercials, about melanoma in animals, without sound, music videos, cartoons or if the duration was less than one minute.…”

Does YouTube Provide Reliable and High-Quality Information? Assessment of Pap Smear Test Videos

“…In our study, the patient uploader rate was only 31%. In contrast, the patient uploader rate was 59.2% for the methotrexate self-injection education article and was 79.6% for the self-administer subcutaneous anti-TNF agent injections article [12, 16]. We assume that such a difference could have occurred since methotrexate and subcutaneous anti-TNF are self-administered procedures applied by patients themselves and probably they want to share their experiences.…”

“…Many studies found that the reliability of the videos uploaded by health channels and health workers was higher than that of the videos uploaded by patients (72.7% and 62.5%, respectively) [12, 16]. In contrast, Fischer et al [25] observed in a study on videos uploaded only by healthcare workers that the quality and reliable video content rate was 61.5%.…”