Reliability and Quality of YouTube Contents Pertaining to Pancreatic Cancer

Abstract

Objective: In our study, we aim to evaluate in terms of patients the quality and reliability of the most relevant and most-watched videos uploaded on YouTube about pancreatic cancer.Method: Before starting the study, YouTube TM search terms were determined by consensus by two General Surgeons. Then, on 10/10/2020, the terms such as "pancreatic cancer", "diagnosis of pancreatic cancer" and "treatment of pancreatic cancer" were entered separately in the search bar of YouTube, "relevance" was selected among the filtering options and the most viewed videos were listed. The videos were evaluated with the Global Quality Scale (GQS), the DISCERN scoring system (Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information, http://www.discern.org.uk), and video power index.Results: Among the 50 videos analysed, 19 videos were uploaded by hospital channels, 17 videos by health channels, seven videos by patients, four videos by blog channels, and three videos by doctors. The mean GQS score of the first researcher was 3.24 ± 0.99 and the mean GQS score of the second researcher was 3.18 ± 0.88 with a significantly high agreement between them (r= 0.628). The mean DISCERN score of the first researcher was 3.48 ± 0.77 and the mean DISCERN score of the second researcher was 3.46 ± 1.09 with a significantly high agreement between them (r= 0.814). Conclusion:In our study, the majority of the videos were found to be of moderate quality. Healthcare professionals should be encouraged to upload more videos with useful content. However, we think that the uploaded videos should definitely go through a professional peer-review process before they are published.

Are YouTube Videos a Reliable Source for Obtaining Information About Colorectal Cancer Screening?

“…We think that public spotlight videos are the most-watched group due to their short length and the high amount of visual content. Previous studies have reported similar results [17][18][19].…”

“…The parameters included in the scale were the risk groups, appropriate time intervals, types, characteristics, advantages and disadvantages of screening tests, and screening termination time (a separate score was kept for each step covered: not mentioned 0 points; briefly mentioned 1 point; mentioned in detail 2 points) (Table 1). Both scales were commonly used in previous YouTube analysis studies pertaining to various disesases [17][18][19].…”

Evaluation of the Reliability and Quality of YouTube Videos on Ovarian Cysts

“…However, the quality of videos, especially with health content, is worried by experts. For this reason, health-related videos on YouTube have been reviewed by experts, and it has been reported that these videos are generally of bad or medium quality [8][9][10][13][14][17][18][19]. In this study, in which the quality and reliability of the videos with ovarian cyst content on YouTube were examined, it was found that 27 of the videos were of bad quality and poor quality, nine of them were of medium quality, and 14 of them were of good quality and reliability.…”

“…However, in many studies, videos uploaded by doctors or healthcare organizations have also been reported to be of poor or moderate quality [10][11]13,17]. Researchers reported that health videos uploaded by experts on major platforms such as YouTube must undergo an absolute peer review [8][9][10][11][12][13][14].…”

“…In addition, considering that approximately one billion hours of views are made per day, it is clear how widely used YouTube is around the world [7]. In many studies evaluating the quality of health-related YouTube videos, it has been reported that the quality of the videos examined, especially those uploaded by non-doctor users, is generally poor or moderate [8][9][10][11][12][13][14]. However, in our literature review, we did not find a study in which ovarian cyst-containing videos on YouTube were examined.…”