Is YouTube™ a Reliable Source of Information for the Current Use of HIPEC in the Treatment of Ovarian Cancer?

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Cancers Pub Date : 2025-10-02 DOI:10.3390/cancers17193222
Francesco Mezzapesa, Elisabetta Pia Bilancia, Margarita Afonina, Stella Di Costanzo, Elena Masina, Pierandrea De Iaco, Anna Myriam Perrone
{"title":"Is YouTube™ a Reliable Source of Information for the Current Use of HIPEC in the Treatment of Ovarian Cancer?","authors":"Francesco Mezzapesa, Elisabetta Pia Bilancia, Margarita Afonina, Stella Di Costanzo, Elena Masina, Pierandrea De Iaco, Anna Myriam Perrone","doi":"10.3390/cancers17193222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction</b>: YouTube™ is a widely accessible platform with unfiltered medical information. This study aimed to evaluate the educational value and reliability of YouTube™ videos on Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer treatment. <b>Methods</b>: YouTube™ videos were searched using the keywords \"<i>ovarian cancer</i>\", \"<i>debulking surgery</i>\", \"<i>hyperthermic</i>\", and \"<i>HIPEC</i>\". Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Audiovisual Content (PEMAT A/V) score, DISCERN, Misinformation Scale, and the Global Quality Scale (GQS) were employed to assess the clarity, quality, and reliability of the information presented. <b>Results</b>: Of the 150 YouTube™ videos screened, 71 were suitable for analysis and categorized by target audience (general public vs. healthcare workers). Most (57, 80.2%) were uploaded after the \"Ov-HIPEC\" trial (18 January 2018), with a trend toward more videos for healthcare workers (<i>p</i> = 0.07). Videos for the general public were shorter (<i>p</i> < 0.001) but received more views (<i>p</i> = 0.06) and likes (<i>p</i> = 0.09), though they were of lower quality. The DISCERN score averaged 50 (IQR: 35-60), with public-targeted videos being less informative (<i>p</i> < 0.001), a trend mirrored by the Misinformation Scale (<i>p</i> < 0.001) and GQS (<i>p</i> < 0.001). The PEMAT A/V scores showed 80% Understandability (IQR: 62-90) and 33% Actionability (IQR: 25-100), with no significant difference between groups (<i>p</i> = 0.15, <i>p</i> = 0.4). <b>Conclusions</b>: While YouTube™ provides useful information for healthcare professionals, it cannot be considered a reliable source for patients seeking information on HIPEC for ovarian cancer. Many videos contribute to misinformation by not properly explaining treatment indications, timing, adverse effects, multimodal approaches, or clinical trial findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":9681,"journal":{"name":"Cancers","volume":"17 19","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancers","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17193222","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: YouTube™ is a widely accessible platform with unfiltered medical information. This study aimed to evaluate the educational value and reliability of YouTube™ videos on Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer treatment. Methods: YouTube™ videos were searched using the keywords "ovarian cancer", "debulking surgery", "hyperthermic", and "HIPEC". Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Audiovisual Content (PEMAT A/V) score, DISCERN, Misinformation Scale, and the Global Quality Scale (GQS) were employed to assess the clarity, quality, and reliability of the information presented. Results: Of the 150 YouTube™ videos screened, 71 were suitable for analysis and categorized by target audience (general public vs. healthcare workers). Most (57, 80.2%) were uploaded after the "Ov-HIPEC" trial (18 January 2018), with a trend toward more videos for healthcare workers (p = 0.07). Videos for the general public were shorter (p < 0.001) but received more views (p = 0.06) and likes (p = 0.09), though they were of lower quality. The DISCERN score averaged 50 (IQR: 35-60), with public-targeted videos being less informative (p < 0.001), a trend mirrored by the Misinformation Scale (p < 0.001) and GQS (p < 0.001). The PEMAT A/V scores showed 80% Understandability (IQR: 62-90) and 33% Actionability (IQR: 25-100), with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.15, p = 0.4). Conclusions: While YouTube™ provides useful information for healthcare professionals, it cannot be considered a reliable source for patients seeking information on HIPEC for ovarian cancer. Many videos contribute to misinformation by not properly explaining treatment indications, timing, adverse effects, multimodal approaches, or clinical trial findings.

YouTube™是目前使用HIPEC治疗卵巢癌的可靠信息来源吗?
YouTube™是一个广泛访问的未经过滤的医疗信息平台。本研究旨在评估YouTube™视频对晚期上皮性卵巢癌热腹腔化疗(HIPEC)治疗的教育价值和可靠性。方法:使用关键词“卵巢癌”、“减体积手术”、“热疗”和“HIPEC”搜索YouTube™视频。采用患者教育材料视听内容评估工具(PEMAT A/V)评分、辨析、错误信息量表和全球质量量表(GQS)来评估所提供信息的清晰度、质量和可靠性。结果:在筛选的150个YouTube™视频中,71个适合按目标受众(普通公众与医护人员)进行分析和分类。大多数(557,80.2%)是在“Ov-HIPEC”试验(2018年1月18日)之后上传的,面向医护人员的视频呈增加趋势(p = 0.07)。面向大众的视频较短(p < 0.001),但获得了更多的观看(p = 0.06)和点赞(p = 0.09),尽管它们的质量较低。DISCERN得分平均为50分(IQR: 35-60),针对公众的视频信息量较低(p < 0.001),错误信息量表(p < 0.001)和GQS (p < 0.001)反映了这一趋势。PEMAT A/V评分的可理解性为80% (IQR: 62-90),可操作性为33% (IQR: 25-100),组间差异无统计学意义(p = 0.15, p = 0.4)。结论:虽然YouTube™为医疗保健专业人员提供了有用的信息,但对于寻求卵巢癌HIPEC信息的患者来说,它不能被视为可靠的来源。许多视频没有正确解释治疗适应症、时间、不良反应、多模式方法或临床试验结果,从而造成错误信息。
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
Cancers
Cancers Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
9.60%
发文量
5371
审稿时长
18.07 days
期刊介绍: Cancers (ISSN 2072-6694) is an international, peer-reviewed open access journal on oncology. It publishes reviews, regular research papers and short communications. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信