YouTube 是有关肉样瘤病的充分信息来源吗?

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Katharina Buschulte, Sarah El-Hadi, Philipp Höger, Claudia Ganter, Marlies Wijsenbeek, Nicolas Kahn, Katharina Kriegsmann, Gillian C. Goobie, Christopher J. Ryerson, Markus Polke, Franziska Trudzinski, Michael Kreuter
{"title":"YouTube 是有关肉样瘤病的充分信息来源吗?","authors":"Katharina Buschulte, Sarah El-Hadi, Philipp Höger, Claudia Ganter, Marlies Wijsenbeek, Nicolas Kahn, Katharina Kriegsmann, Gillian C. Goobie, Christopher J. Ryerson, Markus Polke, Franziska Trudzinski, Michael Kreuter","doi":"10.1186/s12931-024-02956-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The internet is a common source of health information for patients and caregivers. To date, content and information quality of YouTube videos on sarcoidosis has not been studied. The aim of our study was to investigate the content and quality of information on sarcoidosis provided by YouTube videos. Of the first 200 results under the search term “sarcoidosis,” all English-language videos with content directed at patients were included. Two independent investigators assessed the content of the videos based on 25 predefined key features (content score with 0–25 points), as well as reliability and quality (HONCode score with 0–8 points, DISCERN score with 1–5 points). Misinformation contained in the videos was described qualitatively. The majority of the 85 included videos were from an academic or governmental source (n = 63, 74%), and median time since upload was 33 months (IQR 10–55). Median video duration was 8 min (IQR 3–13) and had a median of 2,044 views (IQR 504 − 13,203). Quality assessment suggested partially sufficient information: mean HONCode score was 4.4 (SD 0.9) with 91% of videos having a medium quality HONCode evaluation. Mean DISCERN score was 2.3 (SD 0.5). Video content was generally poor with a mean of 10.5 points (SD 0.6). Frequently absent key features included information on the course of disease (6%), presence of substantial geographical variation (7%), and importance of screening for extrapulmonary manifestations (11%). HONCode scores were higher in videos from academic or governmental sources (p = 0.003), particularly regarding “transparency of sponsorship” (p < 0.001). DISCERN and content scores did not differ by video category. Most YouTube videos present incomplete information reflected in a poor content score, especially regarding screening for extrapulmonary manifestations. Quality was partially sufficient with higher scores in videos from academic or governmental sources, but often missing references and citing specific evidence. Improving patient access to trustworthy and up to date information is needed.","PeriodicalId":21109,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory Research","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is YouTube a sufficient source of information on Sarcoidosis?\",\"authors\":\"Katharina Buschulte, Sarah El-Hadi, Philipp Höger, Claudia Ganter, Marlies Wijsenbeek, Nicolas Kahn, Katharina Kriegsmann, Gillian C. Goobie, Christopher J. Ryerson, Markus Polke, Franziska Trudzinski, Michael Kreuter\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12931-024-02956-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The internet is a common source of health information for patients and caregivers. To date, content and information quality of YouTube videos on sarcoidosis has not been studied. The aim of our study was to investigate the content and quality of information on sarcoidosis provided by YouTube videos. Of the first 200 results under the search term “sarcoidosis,” all English-language videos with content directed at patients were included. Two independent investigators assessed the content of the videos based on 25 predefined key features (content score with 0–25 points), as well as reliability and quality (HONCode score with 0–8 points, DISCERN score with 1–5 points). Misinformation contained in the videos was described qualitatively. The majority of the 85 included videos were from an academic or governmental source (n = 63, 74%), and median time since upload was 33 months (IQR 10–55). Median video duration was 8 min (IQR 3–13) and had a median of 2,044 views (IQR 504 − 13,203). Quality assessment suggested partially sufficient information: mean HONCode score was 4.4 (SD 0.9) with 91% of videos having a medium quality HONCode evaluation. Mean DISCERN score was 2.3 (SD 0.5). Video content was generally poor with a mean of 10.5 points (SD 0.6). Frequently absent key features included information on the course of disease (6%), presence of substantial geographical variation (7%), and importance of screening for extrapulmonary manifestations (11%). HONCode scores were higher in videos from academic or governmental sources (p = 0.003), particularly regarding “transparency of sponsorship” (p < 0.001). DISCERN and content scores did not differ by video category. Most YouTube videos present incomplete information reflected in a poor content score, especially regarding screening for extrapulmonary manifestations. Quality was partially sufficient with higher scores in videos from academic or governmental sources, but often missing references and citing specific evidence. Improving patient access to trustworthy and up to date information is needed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21109,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Respiratory Research\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Respiratory Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12931-024-02956-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12931-024-02956-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

互联网是患者和护理人员获取健康信息的常见来源。迄今为止,有关肉样瘤病的 YouTube 视频的内容和信息质量尚未得到研究。我们的研究旨在调查 YouTube 视频所提供的有关肉样瘤病的信息内容和质量。在以 "肉样瘤病 "为搜索关键词的前 200 个结果中,所有针对患者的英语视频都被包括在内。两名独立调查人员根据 25 个预定义的关键特征(内容分值为 0-25 分)以及可靠性和质量(HONCode 分值为 0-8 分,DISCERN 分值为 1-5 分)对视频内容进行了评估。对视频中包含的错误信息进行了定性描述。在收录的 85 个视频中,大部分来自学术或政府机构(n = 63,占 74%),上传时间中位数为 33 个月(IQR 10-55)。视频时长中位数为 8 分钟(IQR 3-13),浏览次数中位数为 2,044 次(IQR 504 - 13,203 次)。质量评估显示信息部分充足:HONCode 平均得分为 4.4(标准差为 0.9),91% 的视频具有中等质量的 HONCode 评估。DISCERN 平均得分为 2.3(标准差为 0.5)。视频内容普遍较差,平均分为 10.5 分(标准差为 0.6)。经常缺失的关键特征包括病程信息(6%)、存在巨大的地域差异(7%)以及筛查肺外表现的重要性(11%)。学术或政府来源的视频的 HONCode 得分更高(p = 0.003),尤其是在 "赞助透明度 "方面(p < 0.001)。不同类别视频的 DISCERN 和内容得分没有差异。大多数 YouTube 视频提供的信息不完整,内容得分较低,尤其是关于肺外表现的筛查。学术或政府来源的视频得分较高,但往往缺少参考文献和具体证据的引用。需要改进患者获取可信和最新信息的途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is YouTube a sufficient source of information on Sarcoidosis?
The internet is a common source of health information for patients and caregivers. To date, content and information quality of YouTube videos on sarcoidosis has not been studied. The aim of our study was to investigate the content and quality of information on sarcoidosis provided by YouTube videos. Of the first 200 results under the search term “sarcoidosis,” all English-language videos with content directed at patients were included. Two independent investigators assessed the content of the videos based on 25 predefined key features (content score with 0–25 points), as well as reliability and quality (HONCode score with 0–8 points, DISCERN score with 1–5 points). Misinformation contained in the videos was described qualitatively. The majority of the 85 included videos were from an academic or governmental source (n = 63, 74%), and median time since upload was 33 months (IQR 10–55). Median video duration was 8 min (IQR 3–13) and had a median of 2,044 views (IQR 504 − 13,203). Quality assessment suggested partially sufficient information: mean HONCode score was 4.4 (SD 0.9) with 91% of videos having a medium quality HONCode evaluation. Mean DISCERN score was 2.3 (SD 0.5). Video content was generally poor with a mean of 10.5 points (SD 0.6). Frequently absent key features included information on the course of disease (6%), presence of substantial geographical variation (7%), and importance of screening for extrapulmonary manifestations (11%). HONCode scores were higher in videos from academic or governmental sources (p = 0.003), particularly regarding “transparency of sponsorship” (p < 0.001). DISCERN and content scores did not differ by video category. Most YouTube videos present incomplete information reflected in a poor content score, especially regarding screening for extrapulmonary manifestations. Quality was partially sufficient with higher scores in videos from academic or governmental sources, but often missing references and citing specific evidence. Improving patient access to trustworthy and up to date information is needed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Respiratory Research
Respiratory Research 医学-呼吸系统
自引率
1.70%
发文量
314
期刊介绍: Respiratory Research publishes high-quality clinical and basic research, review and commentary articles on all aspects of respiratory medicine and related diseases. As the leading fully open access journal in the field, Respiratory Research provides an essential resource for pulmonologists, allergists, immunologists and other physicians, researchers, healthcare workers and medical students with worldwide dissemination of articles resulting in high visibility and generating international discussion. Topics of specific interest include asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cystic fibrosis, genetics, infectious diseases, interstitial lung diseases, lung development, lung tumors, occupational and environmental factors, pulmonary circulation, pulmonary pharmacology and therapeutics, respiratory immunology, respiratory physiology, and sleep-related respiratory problems.
×
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