Evaluation of the Quality of Educational YouTube Videos on Endoscopic Choanal Atresia.

Journal of Rhinology Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-21 DOI:10.18787/jr.2024.00037
Shirin Irani, Sevil Nasirmohtaram
{"title":"Evaluation of the Quality of Educational YouTube Videos on Endoscopic Choanal Atresia.","authors":"Shirin Irani, Sevil Nasirmohtaram","doi":"10.18787/jr.2024.00037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>YouTube has become a widely used educational platform for medical trainees in endoscopic surgery. However, the quality of surgical videos on this platform remains unregulated. This study evaluates the educational quality of YouTube videos on endoscopic choanal atresia repair using a validated assessment tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this descriptive cross-sectional study, 50 YouTube videos on endoscopic choanal atresia surgery were analyzed. Video quality was assessed using the LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS (LAP-VEGaS) checklist, which evaluates content structure, procedural clarity, and outcomes reporting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 108 initially identified videos, 50 met the inclusion criteria. Video quality scores ranged from 1 to 16, with a median score of 7. The most frequently included elements were step-by-step approach (96%), patient anonymity (96%), and descriptive title (76%). Procedural clarity received moderate scores overall, with only the \"step-by-step approach\" achieving consistent quality. Outcomes reporting was notably deficient, with 90% of videos failing to address postoperative morbidity or complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most YouTube videos on endoscopic choanal atresia surgery lack the quality required for effective surgical education. As digital platforms increasingly supplement traditional training, academic institutions and specialists should prioritize creating and sharing high-quality, standardized educational content on public platforms like YouTube.</p>","PeriodicalId":33935,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rhinology","volume":"32 1","pages":"36-39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11969165/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rhinology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18787/jr.2024.00037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: YouTube has become a widely used educational platform for medical trainees in endoscopic surgery. However, the quality of surgical videos on this platform remains unregulated. This study evaluates the educational quality of YouTube videos on endoscopic choanal atresia repair using a validated assessment tool.

Methods: In this descriptive cross-sectional study, 50 YouTube videos on endoscopic choanal atresia surgery were analyzed. Video quality was assessed using the LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS (LAP-VEGaS) checklist, which evaluates content structure, procedural clarity, and outcomes reporting.

Results: Among 108 initially identified videos, 50 met the inclusion criteria. Video quality scores ranged from 1 to 16, with a median score of 7. The most frequently included elements were step-by-step approach (96%), patient anonymity (96%), and descriptive title (76%). Procedural clarity received moderate scores overall, with only the "step-by-step approach" achieving consistent quality. Outcomes reporting was notably deficient, with 90% of videos failing to address postoperative morbidity or complications.

Conclusion: Most YouTube videos on endoscopic choanal atresia surgery lack the quality required for effective surgical education. As digital platforms increasingly supplement traditional training, academic institutions and specialists should prioritize creating and sharing high-quality, standardized educational content on public platforms like YouTube.

内镜下后肛门闭锁YouTube教学视频质量评价。
背景与目的:YouTube已成为内窥镜外科医学学员广泛使用的教育平台。然而,该平台上的手术视频质量仍然不稳定。本研究使用一种经过验证的评估工具评估YouTube视频在内镜下后鼻腔闭锁修复方面的教育质量。方法:在这个描述性横断面研究中,分析了50个YouTube视频的内镜下后肛门闭锁手术。使用腹腔镜手术视频教育指南(LAP-VEGaS)检查表评估视频质量,评估内容结构、程序清晰度和结果报告。结果:在108个初步确定的视频中,有50个符合纳入标准。视频质量评分从1到16分,中位数为7分。最常见的因素是逐步方法(96%)、患者匿名(96%)和描述性标题(76%)。程序清晰度总体上得到了中等的分数,只有“一步一步的方法”达到了一致的质量。结果报告明显不足,90%的视频未能解决术后发病率或并发症。结论:YouTube上大多数内镜下后肛门闭锁手术视频缺乏有效手术教育所需的质量。随着数字平台越来越多地补充传统培训,学术机构和专家应该优先在YouTube等公共平台上创建和分享高质量、标准化的教育内容。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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