YouTube as a source of information on <i>Helicobacter pylori</i>: Content and quality analysis

Ergenç, Muhammer; Uprak, Tevfik Kıvılcım

doi:10.1111/hel.12971

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(73 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previously, an analysis was conducted to evaluate the content and quality of videos on YouTube, and the results were moderate according to common scoring systems. 26 However, internet restrictions resulted in an infrequent use of YouTube among Chinese citizens. Until now, there has been no…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

TikTok and Bilibili as sources of information on Helicobacter pylori in China: A content and quality analysis

Yang

Wang

et al. 2023

Helicobacter

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHelicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is closely associated with gastric diseases and has a high prevalence in China. Public platforms are considered common and important tools to publicize H. pylori‐related information. This study aimed to assess and compare the content and quality of H. pylori‐related videos on TikTok and Bilibili.Materials and MethodsA search was performed on the TikTok and Bilibili platforms using the keyword “H. pylori”. The source of upload was categorized as for‐profit organizations, general users, health professionals, news agencies, nonprofit organizations, and science communicators. The Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA), Global Quality Scale (GQS), and modified DISCERN scores were used to evaluate the quality of the included videos.ResultsA total of 93 TikTok videos and 79 Bilibili videos were included and analyzed. TikTok videos had a significantly shorter duration than Bilibili videos (64 vs. 149 s, respectively; p < 0.001). The duration of the video showed a positive correlation with the modified DISCERN and GQS scores (p < 0.001, r = 0.388 and r = 0.437, respectively). The JAMA and modified DISCERN scores of the TikTok video were significantly higher in health professionals and nonprofit organizations than in other sources (p < 0.05). For Bilibili, science communicators had a significantly higher JAMA score than the other video sources (p < 0.001). The videos uploaded by news agencies received more views, comments, shares, and favorites than any other organization or individual (p < 0.001).ConclusionsIn China, H. pylori‐related videos from TikTok and Bilibili tended to provide the information regarding the transmission and eradication of H. pylori. However, many videos scored an average rating in content and quality and need to be improved. We recommend that the public obtain H. pylori‐related information through videos uploaded by health professionals, nonprofit organizations, and science communicators.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, excessively long videos could lead to declines in views, likes, and other engagement metrics. 26 This could be explained by the fact that audiences' interests tend to decrease for longer videos, even if the content is abundant. Therefore, video uploaders should offer relevant information of high quality within a reasonable duration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

TikTok and Bilibili as sources of information on Helicobacter pylori in China: A content and quality analysis

Yang

Wang

et al. 2023

Helicobacter

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, in addition to the DISCERN questionnaire, there are several other tools to evaluate the quality of health‐related information, such as the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, 25–27 Global Quality Scores (GQS) 27,28 and the HONcode principles 15,16,26 . We used the DISCERN questionnaire to evaluate video information quality given it has been shown to effectively evaluate the quality of videos on media platforms such as YouTube 26,29,30 and has been used in several studies evaluating the quality of videos on TikTok in Chinese 11,12,27 . We suggest that these different evaluation methods should also be used in future studies to more accurately assess the quality of video information.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information quality of videos related to Helicobacter pylori infection on TikTok: Cross‐sectional study

Tan,

Liu,

Shi

et al. 2023

Helicobacter

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHelicobacter pylori (H. pylori) poses serious threats to human health. TikTok (Douyin in Chinese), a major social media platform focused on sharing short videos, has demonstrated great potential in spreading health information, including information related to H. pylori infection. This study aims to evaluate the content and quality of the information shared in TikTok videos about H. pylori infection in mainland China.MethodsWe collected a sample of 116 videos in Chinese related to H. pylori infection from TikTok. Video contents were evaluated by the coding schema proposed by Goobie et al., and the Hexagonal Radar Schema was used to intuitively display the spotlight and weight of each aspect of the videos. The DISCERN questionnaire was used to evaluate the quality of the videos.ResultsWe identified two major sources of videos related to H. pylori: individual users (n = 89) and organizational users (n = 27). Regarding content, the Hexagonal Radar Charts showed that more than 35% of the videos delivered moderate to high quality content (>1 point) in terms of definition, symptoms and management of the disease, whereas risk factors, evaluation and outcomes of the disease were less discussed. The DISCERN classification data showed that 0.9% of the videos were “very poor,” 5.2% “poor,” 68.7% “fair,” 20.0% “good,” and only 5.2% “excellent”. Regarding total DISCERN scores, videos published by nonprofit organizations had the highest scores, followed by videos uploaded by health professionals.ConclusionAlthough the overall quality of TikTok videos related to H. pylori infection was medium, users should be careful when obtaining information related to H. pylori infection on TikTok and opt for videos uploaded by nonprofit organizations and health professionals.

show abstract

“…The prevalence of Helicobacter varies regionally and is reported to range between 10% and 90% in different studies. [5] These data highlight that H pylori infection is an important public health problem.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How readable and quality are online patient education materials about Helicobacter pylori?: Assessment of the readability, quality and reliability

Yilmaz Hanci

2023

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to examine the readability, reliability, quality, and content of patient education materials (PEM) on the Internet about “Helicobacter pylori (H pylori).” A search was conducted on March 14, 2023, using the keyword “H pylori” in the Google search engine. The readability of PEMs was assessed using the Flesch reading ease score, FKGL, simple measure of gobbledygook, and gunning fog readability formulas. The reliability and quality of the websites were determined using the Journal of American Medical Association score, health on the net foundation code of conduct, global quality score, and DISCERN score. A total of 93 patient education websites were included in the study. In the readability analysis of PEMs, we determined that the Flesch reading ease score was 49,73 (47,46–52,00) (difficult), the mean Flesch–Kincaid grade level and simple measure of gobbledygook were 9,69 (9,26–10,12) and 9,28 (8,96–9,61) years, respectively, and the mean gunning fog score was 12,47 (12,03–12,91) (very difficult). Most of the evaluated patient educational materials were commercial websites (n = 50, 53.8%). It was found that 16.1% of the websites were of high quality according to global quality score, 30.1% were HON code certified, and 23.7% of the websites were highly reliable according to Journal of American Medical Association scores. There was no statistically significant difference between website typologies and readability (P > .05). However, there was a statistically significant difference between website typologies and quality and reliability scores (P < .005). Compared to the sixth grade level recommended by the American Medical Association and National Institutes of Health, the readability of H pylori-related internet-based PEMs is quite high. On the other hand, the reliability and quality of the PEMs were determined as moderate to poor. PEMs for issues threatening public health should be prepared with attention to recommendations on readability.

show abstract

YouTube as a source of information on Helicobacter pylori: Content and quality analysis

Cited by 6 publications

References 23 publications

TikTok and Bilibili as sources of information on Helicobacter pylori in China: A content and quality analysis

TikTok and Bilibili as sources of information on Helicobacter pylori in China: A content and quality analysis

Information quality of videos related to Helicobacter pylori infection on TikTok: Cross‐sectional study

How readable and quality are online patient education materials about Helicobacter pylori?: Assessment of the readability, quality and reliability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About