Evaluation of the Quality of Peri-implantitis Videos on YouTube

Abstract

Although many studies have evaluated the quality of YouTube videos related to dentistry, just one study has evaluated the quality of YouTube videos related to peri-implantitis. The aim of the cross-sectional study was to evaluate the quality of peri-implantitis-related YouTube videos. Two periodontists evaluated 47 videos that met the inclusion criteria, such as the country of upload, source of videos, number of views, likes and dislikes, viewing rate, interaction index, number of days since upload, duration of the video, usefulness score, global quality scale score, and comments. Peri-implantitis was evaluated using a 7-question system of the videos, 44.7% and 55.3% were uploaded by commercial companies and health care professionals, respectively. Although the usefulness score of the videos uploaded by health care professionals was statistically significantly higher (P = 0.022), the number of views, numbers of likes and dislikes were similar between the groups (P > 0.050). Although the usefulness score and global quality scale score of the perfect videos were statistically different between the groups (P < 0.001; P < 0.001, respectively), the number of views, numbers of likes, and dislikes were similar. A strong positive correlation was found between the number of views and the number of likes (P<0.001). A strong negative correlation was found between the interaction index and the number of days since upload (P<0.001). As a result, YouTube videos on peri-implantitis were limited in number and had poor quality. Thus, videos of perfect quality should be uploaded.

Critical appraisal of YouTube videos regarding peri‐implant diseases and conditions: A cross‐sectional analysis

“…With the use of DISCERN tool, 53 videos were rated as "poor" quality with an average DISCERN score of 35.04 ± 6.3, making them an unreliable source of information for stakeholders. These findings were in agreement with a recently published study (Bariş et al, 2023). Nevertheless, the assessment was performed on 47 videos using usefulness and global quality score tools.…”

YouTube as a source of information about apical resection: a metadological study

“…13,14 Furthermore, the quality and accuracy of the information presented in the videos were evaluated using the completeness score, as in previous studies. 13,14,17 The GQS and DISCERN scores of the dentist/expert upload source were significantly higher than those of commercial and other sources. Additionally, the GOS, DISCERN, and completeness scores of the dentist/ expert source were statistically higher than those of all other sources.…”

“…18 At this point, there are many studies in the fields of dentistry and medicine in which content analysis is made of videos uploaded to YouTube, which is a widely used area. [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] But, no other study has analysed English YouTube videos related to apical resection using the keyword apicectomy. Our study is the first to analyse the usefulness of English videos on YouTube about apical resection, making it an original study.…”

“…There are various studies in the literature that use a similar number of videos as our study. [13][14][15] Various filters are available for sorting videos, including 'views', 'upload date', and 'video duration'. For this study, the default filter for YouTube search was 'sort by relevance', as it Because this is the most commonly used option by invudials.…”

“…12 YouTube videos on medicine and dentistry have been evaluated in previous studies. [13][14][15][16][17] However, no study has been conducted to evaluate YouTube videos related to apical surgery using the keyword 'apicectomy'. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze the accuracy and reliability of the information obtained from YouTube videos on apical surgery.…”