Juliusz Jan Szczesniewski Dudzik , Percy Miguel Rodríguez Castro , Juan Boronat Catalá , Alba María García-Cano Fernández , Ana García Tello , Luis Llanes González
{"title":"Disfunción eréctil y YouTube: calidad de los vídeos en español","authors":"Juliusz Jan Szczesniewski Dudzik , Percy Miguel Rodríguez Castro , Juan Boronat Catalá , Alba María García-Cano Fernández , Ana García Tello , Luis Llanes González","doi":"10.1016/j.androl.2023.100351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Erectile dysfunction (ED) is one of the most prevalent urological diseases, but there is limited data about the quality of its information in social networks. The aim of our study was to assess the quality of ED information contained in YouTube videos.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>Descriptive study of the first 50 Spanish-language videos, published on YouTube, evaluated by three urologists. We used two validated questionnaires: PEMAT (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool) and DISCERN. Videos were classified according to DISCERN score into poor or moderate-good quality.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The median time duration was 2.42<!--> <!-->minutes (0.15-3.58), 94,197 views (2,313-3,027,890), 682.5 «likes» (0-54,020) and 39 «dislikes» (0-2843).</p><p>The median of PEMAT score was 29% (9%-95.5%) in understandability and 29% (0-95.5%) in actionability. According to DISCERN score 27 videos (57.4%) had poor quality and 20 (42.6%) moderate-good quality. There were no significant differences between the two groups in time duration, views, «likes» or «dislikes». There were differences in PEMAT score in understandability and actionability.</p><p>The 86.7% of the moderate-good quality videos were starred by health care provider (<em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->.001). Also, the 85.7% of videos that describes treatment had moderate-good quality (<em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->.001). The 84% of the non-medical videos had a poor quality (<em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->.001).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Most ED videos on YouTube have poor quality. The highest quality videos are those made by professionals, although they are not the most viewed. It would be important to develop measures to prevent the spread of misinformation among social network users.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49129,"journal":{"name":"Revista Internacional De Andrologia","volume":"21 3","pages":"Article 100351"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Internacional De Andrologia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1698031X23000110","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANDROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Introduction
Erectile dysfunction (ED) is one of the most prevalent urological diseases, but there is limited data about the quality of its information in social networks. The aim of our study was to assess the quality of ED information contained in YouTube videos.
Material and methods
Descriptive study of the first 50 Spanish-language videos, published on YouTube, evaluated by three urologists. We used two validated questionnaires: PEMAT (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool) and DISCERN. Videos were classified according to DISCERN score into poor or moderate-good quality.
Results
The median time duration was 2.42 minutes (0.15-3.58), 94,197 views (2,313-3,027,890), 682.5 «likes» (0-54,020) and 39 «dislikes» (0-2843).
The median of PEMAT score was 29% (9%-95.5%) in understandability and 29% (0-95.5%) in actionability. According to DISCERN score 27 videos (57.4%) had poor quality and 20 (42.6%) moderate-good quality. There were no significant differences between the two groups in time duration, views, «likes» or «dislikes». There were differences in PEMAT score in understandability and actionability.
The 86.7% of the moderate-good quality videos were starred by health care provider (P = .001). Also, the 85.7% of videos that describes treatment had moderate-good quality (P = .001). The 84% of the non-medical videos had a poor quality (P = .001).
Conclusion
Most ED videos on YouTube have poor quality. The highest quality videos are those made by professionals, although they are not the most viewed. It would be important to develop measures to prevent the spread of misinformation among social network users.
期刊介绍:
Revista Internacional de Andrología es la revista oficial de la Asociación Española de Andrología, Medicina Sexual y Reproductiva (ASESA), la Sociedade Portuguesa de Ardrologia, la Sociedad Argentina de Andrología (SAA), la Asociación Iberoamericana de Sociedades de Andrología (ANDRO), y la Federación Española de Sociedades de Sexología.
La revista publicada trimestralmente es revisada por pares y es líder en el la especialidad y en español y portugués. Recientemente también publica artículos en inglés.
El objetivo de la revista es principalmente la promoción del conocimiento y la educación médica continua, con un enfoque especial en el público español y latinoamericano, a través de la publicación de las contribuciones importantes de la investigación en el campo. Todos los miembros de las sociedades antes mencionadas reciben la revista y otros suscriptores individuales e institucionales de España, Portugal y América Latina.