Plausibility of Using a Checklist With YouTube to Facilitate the Discovery of Acute Low Back Pain Self-Management Content: Exploratory Study

Zheluk, Andrey; Maddock, Jess

doi:10.2196/23366

Cited by 10 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Khazaal et al [ 34 ] developed an abbreviated 6-item version (Brief DISCERN) with comparable reliability and validity, which preserves the advantages of the original tool while affording a potentially more user-friendly format. Thus, we used the Brief DISCERN quality assessment tool, which has been previously used [ 35 , 36 ]. Sources are scored from 1 to 5 based on the criteria listed in Table 3 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Public’s Most Frequently Asked Questions Regarding COVID-19 Vaccines Using Search Engine Analytics in the United States: Observational Study

Sajjadi¹,

Shepard²,

Ottwell³

et al. 2021

JMIR Infodemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The emergency authorization of COVID-19 vaccines has offered the first means of long-term protection against COVID-19–related illness since the pandemic began. It is important for health care professionals to understand commonly held COVID-19 vaccine concerns and to be equipped with quality information that can be used to assist in medical decision-making. Objective Using Google’s RankBrain machine learning algorithm, we sought to characterize the content of the most frequently asked questions (FAQs) about COVID-19 vaccines evidenced by internet searches. Secondarily, we sought to examine the information transparency and quality of sources used by Google to answer FAQs on COVID-19 vaccines. Methods We searched COVID-19 vaccine terms on Google and used the “People also ask” box to obtain FAQs generated by Google’s machine learning algorithms. FAQs are assigned an “answer” source by Google. We extracted FAQs and answer sources related to COVID-19 vaccines. We used the Rothwell Classification of Questions to categorize questions on the basis of content. We classified answer sources as either academic, commercial, government, media outlet, or medical practice. We used the Journal of the American Medical Association’s (JAMA’s) benchmark criteria to assess information transparency and Brief DISCERN to assess information quality for answer sources. FAQ and answer source type frequencies were calculated. Chi-square tests were used to determine associations between information transparency by source type. One-way analysis of variance was used to assess differences in mean Brief DISCERN scores by source type. Results Our search yielded 28 unique FAQs about COVID-19 vaccines. Most COVID-19 vaccine–related FAQs were seeking factual information (22/28, 78.6%), specifically about safety and efficacy (9/22, 40.9%). The most common source type was media outlets (12/28, 42.9%), followed by government sources (11/28, 39.3%). Nineteen sources met 3 or more JAMA benchmark criteria with government sources as the majority (10/19, 52.6%). JAMA benchmark criteria performance did not significantly differ among source types (χ24=7.40; P=.12). One-way analysis of variance revealed a significant difference in mean Brief DISCERN scores by source type (F4,23=10.27; P<.001). Conclusions The most frequently asked COVID-19 vaccine–related questions pertained to vaccine safety and efficacy. We found that government sources provided the most transparent and highest-quality web-based COVID-19 vaccine–related information. Recognizing common questions and concerns about COVID-19 vaccines may assist in improving vaccination efforts.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Public’s Most Frequently Asked Questions Regarding COVID-19 Vaccines Using Search Engine Analytics in the United States: Observational Study

Sajjadi¹,

Shepard²,

Ottwell³

et al. 2021

JMIR Infodemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We modified the methods developed by Zheluk and Maddock for their analysis of YouTube videos about acute non-specific low back pain (ALBP) [ 31 ]. First, in this study, we have assumed that ANSBP TikTok videos are viewed by patients for self-care guidance only (i.e., TikTok videos are viewed independent of health advice).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Third, in this project, we did not analyse information quality. Zheluk and Maddock found that the Brief DISCERN information quality instrument was less sensitive in identifying differences in the self-management content of YouTube videos than an evidence-based reference list [ 31 ]. Similarly, Azer and colleagues suggested that information quality tools were not suitable for analysis of YouTube video content [ 34 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The six creator identities were: chiropractor, fitness professional, influencer, physician, physiotherapist, and other. We analysed the final data set based on the ALBP reference checklist originally developed for the analysis of YouTube videos by Zheluk and Maddock [31]. See Table 4 for the reference checklist codebook.…”

Section: Rq2: What Are the Tiktok Creator Identities In The Final Dat...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Systematic reviews of YouTube analysis methods have focused on the use of validated reference checklists and described the range of approaches and indicators across multiple studies [ 29 , 30 ]. In 2020, Zheluk and Maddock described three broad approaches to the analysis of YouTube health content [ 31 ]. These approaches were: (1) analysis of the video metadata exclusive of the content; the most common metadata elements included the number of views, video length, likes, date posted, and language of the video, (2) information quality of videos using validated instruments such as DISCERN (no abbreviation), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmark Criteria, and Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode) to evaluate the quality of health information directed at consumers and clinicians; Lee and colleagues reviewed several approaches to assessing health information quality and among the common dimensions by these researchers were accuracy, completeness, consistency, timeliness, validity, and uniqueness [ 32 ], and (3) evaluation of video content by expert clinicians by comparing content to reference standards.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Analysis of Acute Non-specific Back Pain Content on TikTok: An Exploratory Study

Zheluk¹,

Anderson²,

Dineen-Griffin³

2022

Cureus

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we evaluated the scope of acute non-specific back pain (ANSBP) content available on TikTok (ByteDance Ltd, Beijing, China) in 2021. It is plausible that TikTok's popularity among teenagers, adolescents, and young adults may influence decision-making about what constitutes appropriate ANSBP self-care among a younger age cohort. MethodsWe examined 157 of the most viewed videos available through the hashtag #backpain available on TikTok in September 2021. We examined the following research questions: (1) What are the metadata characteristics of the videos in the final data set?, (2) What are the creator identities reflected in the final data set in this study?, (3) What are the ANSBP self-care content themes in the final data set?, and (4) What are the characteristics of the data set based on a low back pain reference checklist based on consensus guidelines?. ResultsWe identified clear differences based on TikTok creator identity in our data set of most popular videos. We examined videos created by chiropractors, fitness professionals, influencers, physicians, physiotherapists, and other creator identities. We found that the TikTok videos created by chiropractors were consistently among the most viewed, most commented, and most shared. Conversely, chiropractic TikTok videos consistently had the lowest self-care reference checklist scores relative to all other disciplines. That is, TikTok videos created by chiropractors were least likely to reflect the scientific consensus on treating ANSBP. DiscussionTikTok is an increasingly popular medium for disseminating short health messages. The main cohort using TikTok is young and at risk of ANSBP. However, we postulate that the messages reaching young TikTok users overall do not generally reflect the self-care advice described in consensus guidelines. ConclusionTikTok is a popular social media channel among young people. However, the most viewed TikTok videos about ANSBP are not produced by mainstream health professionals and the videos featuring the #backpain hashtag do not generally reflect contemporary evidence-based practice. There is considerable scope for mainstream health professionals to provide evidence-informed self-management and self-care content for ANSBP on TikTok.

show abstract

Patient education on subacromial impingement syndrome

Jessen

Lorenz

Boehm³

et al. 2022

Orthopädie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The purpose of this study was to assess the reliability and educational quality of content available on Google and YouTube regarding subacromial impingement syndrome (SAIS). Methods Google and YouTube were queried for English and German results on SAIS using the search terms “shoulder impingement” and the German equivalent “Schulter Impingement”. The analysis was restricted to the first 30 results of each query performed. Number of views and likes as well as upload source and length of content were recorded. Each result was evaluated by two independent reviewers using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria (score range, 0–5) to assess reliability and the DISCERN score (score range, 16–80) and a SAIS-specific score (SAISS, score range, 0–100) to evaluate educational content. Results The 58 websites found on Google and 48 videos found on YouTube were included in the analysis. The average number of views per video was 220,180 ± 415,966. The average text length was 1375 ± 997 words and the average video duration 456 ± 318 s. The upload sources were mostly non-physician based (74.1% of Google results and 79.2% of YouTube videos). Overall, there were poor results in reliability and educational quality, with sources from doctors having a significantly higher mean reliability measured in the JAMA score (p < 0.001) and educational quality in DISCERN (p < 0.001) and SAISS (p = 0.021). There was no significant difference between German and English results but texts performed significantly better than videos in terms of reliability (p = 0.002) and educational quality (p < 0.001). Conclusion Information on SAIS found on Google and YouTube is of low reliability and quality. Therefore, orthopedic health practitioners and healthcare providers should inform patients that this source of information may be unreliable and make efforts to provide patients with higher quality alternatives. Level of evidence: IV, case series.

show abstract

Plausibility of Using a Checklist With YouTube to Facilitate the Discovery of Acute Low Back Pain Self-Management Content: Exploratory Study

Cited by 10 publications

References 83 publications

Examining the Public’s Most Frequently Asked Questions Regarding COVID-19 Vaccines Using Search Engine Analytics in the United States: Observational Study

Examining the Public’s Most Frequently Asked Questions Regarding COVID-19 Vaccines Using Search Engine Analytics in the United States: Observational Study

Analysis of Acute Non-specific Back Pain Content on TikTok: An Exploratory Study

Patient education on subacromial impingement syndrome

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About