Evaluation of YouTube Information Quality About Pes Planus.

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Hacı Ali Olçar, Berna Güngör, Tolgahan Kuru, Davut Aydın, Gürdal Nusran
{"title":"Evaluation of YouTube Information Quality About Pes Planus.","authors":"Hacı Ali Olçar, Berna Güngör, Tolgahan Kuru, Davut Aydın, Gürdal Nusran","doi":"10.7547/22-168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to measure the quality of information about \"flatfoot\" and \"pes planus\" presented online on the social media site YouTube and to determine the trends of viewers to medical information on YouTube.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>\"Flatfoot and pes planus\" was typed into the YouTube search module. From the search results, videos with 50,000 views or more, longer than 45 seconds, and containing information about flatfoot and pes planus disease were selected. DISCERN and JAMA scoring, daily average views, number of likes, and number of comments were collected from 53 videos that met the criteria. The profession of the sharer was evaluated in terms of the information quality of the sharing and the orientation of the audience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean number of views per day of the examined videos was 2,047. The mean video presentation time was 8 minutes 50 seconds. The mean JAMA score was 2 of 4 and the mean DISCERN score was 38.16 of 75. According to the DISCERN score according to the professions, the video quality was moderate for doctors (41.44 ± 12.99), moderate for physiotherapists (41.91 ± 9.04), poor for coaches (32.78 ± 7.87), poor for patients (34.50 ± 5.32), and weak for others (34.89 ± 14.00). According to the Spearman correlation between DISCERN score and mean daily viewing, significant relationships were found for the doctors (P = .0102) and others groups (P = .0033); however, no significant relationships were observed for the physiotherapists group (P = .1073), the flatfoot patients group (P = .5363), and the coaches group (P = .9111). There were significant relationships between like and comment counts in all groups (doctors, P = .0088; coaches, P = .0069; physiotherapists, P = .0007; others, P =.0018; and patients, P = .0066).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Looking at previous studies, it was observed that the quality of online health information was historically inadequate. Likewise, in our study on YouTube, we found that the quality of flatfoot and pes planus information was poor to moderate.</p>","PeriodicalId":17241,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7547/22-168","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to measure the quality of information about "flatfoot" and "pes planus" presented online on the social media site YouTube and to determine the trends of viewers to medical information on YouTube.

Methods: "Flatfoot and pes planus" was typed into the YouTube search module. From the search results, videos with 50,000 views or more, longer than 45 seconds, and containing information about flatfoot and pes planus disease were selected. DISCERN and JAMA scoring, daily average views, number of likes, and number of comments were collected from 53 videos that met the criteria. The profession of the sharer was evaluated in terms of the information quality of the sharing and the orientation of the audience.

Results: The mean number of views per day of the examined videos was 2,047. The mean video presentation time was 8 minutes 50 seconds. The mean JAMA score was 2 of 4 and the mean DISCERN score was 38.16 of 75. According to the DISCERN score according to the professions, the video quality was moderate for doctors (41.44 ± 12.99), moderate for physiotherapists (41.91 ± 9.04), poor for coaches (32.78 ± 7.87), poor for patients (34.50 ± 5.32), and weak for others (34.89 ± 14.00). According to the Spearman correlation between DISCERN score and mean daily viewing, significant relationships were found for the doctors (P = .0102) and others groups (P = .0033); however, no significant relationships were observed for the physiotherapists group (P = .1073), the flatfoot patients group (P = .5363), and the coaches group (P = .9111). There were significant relationships between like and comment counts in all groups (doctors, P = .0088; coaches, P = .0069; physiotherapists, P = .0007; others, P =.0018; and patients, P = .0066).

Conclusions: Looking at previous studies, it was observed that the quality of online health information was historically inadequate. Likewise, in our study on YouTube, we found that the quality of flatfoot and pes planus information was poor to moderate.

评估 YouTube 上有关扁平苔癣的信息质量。
研究背景本研究的目的是测量社交媒体网站YouTube上有关 "扁平足 "和 "扁平足趾 "的在线信息的质量,并确定YouTube上医疗信息的浏览趋势:在 YouTube 搜索模块中输入 "扁平足和扁平足趾"。从搜索结果中选择浏览量在 50,000 次或以上、时长超过 45 秒、包含有关扁平足和扁平足趾疾病信息的视频。从符合标准的 53 个视频中收集了 DISCERN 和 JAMA 评分、日均浏览量、点赞数和评论数。从分享的信息质量和受众定位的角度对分享者的职业进行了评估:受检视频的平均日浏览量为 2,047 次。平均视频演示时间为 8 分 50 秒。JAMA 评分的平均值为 2 分(满分 4 分),DISCERN 评分的平均值为 38.16 分(满分 75 分)。根据不同职业的 DISCERN 评分,医生的视频质量为中等(41.44 ± 12.99),物理治疗师的视频质量为中等(41.91 ± 9.04),教练的视频质量为差(32.78 ± 7.87),病人的视频质量为差(34.50 ± 5.32),其他人员的视频质量为弱(34.89 ± 14.00)。根据 DISCERN 分数与平均每日观看次数之间的 Spearman 相关性,医生组(P = .0102)和其他组(P = .0033)之间存在显著关系;但物理治疗师组(P = .1073)、扁平足患者组(P = .5363)和教练组(P = .9111)之间没有显著关系。所有组别中的喜欢数和评论数之间都存在明显关系(医生组,P = .0088;教练组,P = .0069;物理治疗师组,P = .0007;其他组,P = .0018;患者组,P = .0066):综观以往的研究,我们发现在线健康信息的质量历来不高。同样,在我们对 YouTube 的研究中,我们也发现扁平足和趾隙炎信息的质量为中下等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
128
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, the official journal of the Association, is the oldest and most frequently cited peer-reviewed journal in the profession of foot and ankle medicine. Founded in 1907 and appearing 6 times per year, it publishes research studies, case reports, literature reviews, special communications, clinical correspondence, letters to the editor, book reviews, and various other types of submissions. The Journal is included in major indexing and abstracting services for biomedical literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信