TikTok as a platform for hysteroscopy information: An analytical video-based cross-sectional study to assess quality, reliability, and accuracy.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Salvatore Giovanni Vitale, Stefano Angioni, Stefania Saponara, Gilda Sicilia, Andrea Etrusco, Maurizio Nicola D'Alterio, Luigi Cobellis, Pasquale De Franciscis, Gaetano Riemma
{"title":"TikTok as a platform for hysteroscopy information: An analytical video-based cross-sectional study to assess quality, reliability, and accuracy.","authors":"Salvatore Giovanni Vitale, Stefano Angioni, Stefania Saponara, Gilda Sicilia, Andrea Etrusco, Maurizio Nicola D'Alterio, Luigi Cobellis, Pasquale De Franciscis, Gaetano Riemma","doi":"10.1002/ijgo.15846","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the quality, reliability, and level of misinformation in TikTok videos about hysteroscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional analysis of TikTok videos retrieved using \"hysteroscopy\" as search term was performed. Patient education materials assessment tool for audio-visual content (PEMAT A/V), the modified DISCERN (mDISCERN), global quality scale (GQS), video information and quality index (VIQI) and misinformation assessment were used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of three hundred videos captured, 156 were excluded and 144 were included. Most videos were partially accurate or uninformative (43.8% and 34.7%, respectively). Non-healthcare providers produced more inaccurate or uninformative videos than healthcare workers (51.1% vs 4.0%; P < 0.001). Compared to content by professionals, content by patients showed increased distrust towards gynecologists (11.7% vs 0%; P = 0.012) and increased incidence of anxiety and concern towards hysteroscopy (25.5% vs 2%; P < 0.001). PEMAT A/V scores for understandability and actionability were low at 42.9% (interquartile range [IQR]: 11.1-70) and 0% (IQR: 0-0), respectively. Understandability (P < 0.001) and actionability (P = 0.001) were higher for professionals' created content relative to patients' videos. Similarly, median mDISCERN score was low (1 [IQR 0-2]), with significantly higher score for healthcare professionals compared to patients (P < 0.001). Overall video quality was also low, with median VIQI and GQS score of 7 (IQR 4-11) and 1 (IQR 1-3), respectively, and significantly higher scores for healthcare workers' captions compared to patients' for both (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TikTok videos' quality on hysteroscopy seems unsatisfactory and misinformative, with low understandability and actionability scores. Videos recorded by healthcare workers show higher quality and less misinformation than those by patients. Raising the awareness regarding the low quality of medical information on social media is crucial to increase future reliability and trustworthiness.</p>","PeriodicalId":14164,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15846","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To assess the quality, reliability, and level of misinformation in TikTok videos about hysteroscopy.

Methods: A cross-sectional analysis of TikTok videos retrieved using "hysteroscopy" as search term was performed. Patient education materials assessment tool for audio-visual content (PEMAT A/V), the modified DISCERN (mDISCERN), global quality scale (GQS), video information and quality index (VIQI) and misinformation assessment were used.

Results: Of three hundred videos captured, 156 were excluded and 144 were included. Most videos were partially accurate or uninformative (43.8% and 34.7%, respectively). Non-healthcare providers produced more inaccurate or uninformative videos than healthcare workers (51.1% vs 4.0%; P < 0.001). Compared to content by professionals, content by patients showed increased distrust towards gynecologists (11.7% vs 0%; P = 0.012) and increased incidence of anxiety and concern towards hysteroscopy (25.5% vs 2%; P < 0.001). PEMAT A/V scores for understandability and actionability were low at 42.9% (interquartile range [IQR]: 11.1-70) and 0% (IQR: 0-0), respectively. Understandability (P < 0.001) and actionability (P = 0.001) were higher for professionals' created content relative to patients' videos. Similarly, median mDISCERN score was low (1 [IQR 0-2]), with significantly higher score for healthcare professionals compared to patients (P < 0.001). Overall video quality was also low, with median VIQI and GQS score of 7 (IQR 4-11) and 1 (IQR 1-3), respectively, and significantly higher scores for healthcare workers' captions compared to patients' for both (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion: TikTok videos' quality on hysteroscopy seems unsatisfactory and misinformative, with low understandability and actionability scores. Videos recorded by healthcare workers show higher quality and less misinformation than those by patients. Raising the awareness regarding the low quality of medical information on social media is crucial to increase future reliability and trustworthiness.

嘀嗒作为宫腔镜检查信息平台:一项基于视频的横断面分析研究,以评估质量、可靠性和准确性。
目的评估 TikTok 视频中有关宫腔镜检查的质量、可靠性和误导程度:方法:对以 "宫腔镜 "为搜索词的 TikTok 视频进行横向分析。使用了视听内容患者教育材料评估工具(PEMAT A/V)、改良DISCERN(mDISCERN)、全球质量量表(GQS)、视频信息和质量指数(VIQI)以及错误信息评估:在拍摄的 300 个视频中,156 个被排除,144 个被纳入。大多数视频部分准确或信息不全(分别为 43.8% 和 34.7%)。与医护人员相比,非医护人员制作了更多不准确或无信息的视频(51.1% 对 4.0%;P 结论:TikTok 视频在医护人员和非医护人员之间的质量差异很大:TikTok 有关宫腔镜检查的视频质量似乎并不令人满意,信息错误,可理解性和可操作性得分较低。与患者录制的视频相比,医护人员录制的视频质量更高,错误信息更少。提高人们对社交媒体上低质量医疗信息的认识,对于提高未来的可靠性和可信度至关重要。
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
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
493
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics publishes articles on all aspects of basic and clinical research in the fields of obstetrics and gynecology and related subjects, with emphasis on matters of worldwide interest.
×
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