2020
DOI: 10.3991/ijoe.v16i01.11558
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Review on the Reliability of Medical Contents on YouTube

Abstract: <p class="0abstract"><strong>Abstract—</strong> Social media and YouTube, in particular, has become an avenue for quick dissemination of information. Patients now search the YouTube website for information on diseases, treatment options, surgery, and general health information. This paper reviews the different reliability methods, results, conclusions and recommendations of contributions on the medical videos on YouTube. A keyword search was done on different databases such as PubMed, Scopus,… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
(93 reference statements)
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It can be said that this way of expressing their profession is more attractive to doctors than uploading videos to YouTube in terms of both self-improvement and patient guidance. Another reason that doctors refrain from uploading videos to YouTube is the fear of infringing copyright and privacy [21].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It can be said that this way of expressing their profession is more attractive to doctors than uploading videos to YouTube in terms of both self-improvement and patient guidance. Another reason that doctors refrain from uploading videos to YouTube is the fear of infringing copyright and privacy [21].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It can be said that this way of expressing their profession is more attractive to doctors than uploading videos to YouTube in terms of both self-improvement and patient guidance. Another reason that doctors refrain from uploading videos to YouTube is the fear of infringing copyright and privacy [ 21 ]. While the responsibility for the contents uploaded by corporate health channels belongs to the relevant institution, the responsibility for the content of videos directly uploaded by doctors belongs to the doctors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to a review paper, pre-existing tools such as the mDISCERN and the GQS, which were not initially designed for video assessment, are still being used frequently [ 12 , 15 ]. The mDISCERN was developed to critically appraise users of consumer health information from the beginning, and the GQS is a grading system created to evaluate the overall quality of each website [ 17 , 18 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, previous studies evaluating the quality of medical information on social media have mainly focused on medical videos for patients [ 12 ]. There were a few reports that studied the suitability of online videos for medical professional education, but the results were inconsistent [ 10 , 13 , 14 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…10 A review of reliability of the patient information provided through YouTube also indicated that the YouTube contents are misleading (in 65% of studied articles), are not from trusted sources (63.7% of studied articles),and only 35% of the research articles recommended that medical videos available through YouTube are useful and can be a good source of patient education. 26…”
Section: Death and Hospital Readmissionmentioning
confidence: 99%