Figure - uploaded by Nazım Karahan
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Journal of American Medical Association benchmark criteria
Source publication
Objective
The purpose of this study is to investigate the quality and reliability of YouTube videos regarding developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH).
Background
YouTube is one of the most popular websites used as a source of information, but the variety in authorship and lack of a peer-review process are problems.
Methods
The search string “devel...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... JAMAS uses four criteria to assess the accuracy of the source of the medical information [10]. For each criterion, 1 point was given to each video ( Table 1). The quality and educational quality of the videos were assessed using GQS; 1 point was given for poor quality and 5 points were given for excellent quality ( Table 2). ...Context 2
... JAMAS uses four criteria to assess the accuracy of the source of the medical information [10]. For each criterion, 1 point was given to each video ( Table 1). The quality and educational quality of the videos were assessed using GQS; 1 point was given for poor quality and 5 points were given for excellent quality ( Table 2). ...Similar publications
Background
The aim of this study was to assess the content, readability, and quality of online resources on septic arthritis, a crucial orthopedic condition necessitating immediate diagnosis and treatment to avert serious complications, with a particular focus on the relevance to individuals from the general public.
Methods
Two search terms (“sept...
Citations
... The literature shows that search engines on the Internet and YouTube provide incorrect answers in certain critical situations to a large number of their users [10,11] However, this study revealed that ChatGPT and Gemini have correct data at hand, unlike many other Internet sites. It is suggested that it can be used in various other fields. ...
This study explores the strengths and limits of large language models (LLMs) in exploring the information on history, an area unexplored in the existing literature. ChatGPT and Gemini, as LLMs, have demonstrated superior performance in education, healthcare, and business. This study proposes utilizing the ChatGPT (ver. 3.5) and Gemini applications to acquire information on historical figures like Sher Shah Suri and Mughal Emperors and Sikhs in the subcontinent. To evaluate the proposed study, this study used two data sets: the first data set comprised a set of questions (n = 26) and the second data set contained questions (n = 35). The results indicate that ChatGPT provides concise answers to the questions of both datasets compared to the Gemini application. However, Gemini exhibited a higher accuracy (92.30%) than ChatGPT with accuracy (76.92%) for dataset 1. For the dataset 2, ChatGPT showed better accuracy (68.57%) than Gemini with accuracy (65.71%). Further research could expand on this study by employing additional artificial intelligence (AI) tools on large-scale datasets from diverse domains.
... The DISCERN score was used to assess educational quality (10,12,14), and The Global Quality Score (GQS) (15,16) was employed to obtain a newly defined YouTube femoral head avascular necrosis score (FHAVNS). This value was produced with consideration of the current YouTube scores previously available in the literature (12,(15)(16)(17). In the 14-parameter scoring system, video quality was categorized as being (0-4) poor, (5-8) fair, (8)(9)(10)(11) good, or (12-14) excellent ( Table 1). ...
Objective: Videos related to avascular necrosis of the femoral head are no exception, and so the aim of this study is to evaluate the educational quality of YouTube videos on this topic. Methods: A standardized video search was performed on YouTube using the terms "avascular necrosis of the hip", "osteonecrosis of the hip" and "avascular necrosis of the femoral head". The top 50 videos were then analyzed, and the characteristics and content of the videos were recorded. The Journal of the American Medical Association criteria, The DISCERN score, The Global Quality Score and the new YouTube Avascular Necrosis of the Femoral Head Score were all used to assess the reliability and accuracy of the videos. Results: The median video duration of the 50 videos was 10.85 ± 19.17 minutes. The median number of views was 10,866 (range 221 to 278,174). According to the video content, 60% of the videos contained information about the disease, 10% were about patient experience, and the remaining 30% related to surgical technique or approach. Most of the videos were uploaded by physicians. The rate of low-quality videos was determined as following according to the different evaluative systems: 68% according to the newly defined YouTube Avascular Necrosis of the Femoral Head Score, 60% according to the DISCERN score, and 56% according to The Global Quality Score. The Journal of the American Medical Association, The Global Quality Score, and DISCERN score were significantly correlated with video duration, while the New YouTube Avascular Necrosis of the Femoral Head Score was significantly correlated with video duration, time since upload, number of views, and like rate.
... Our methodology was based on previous research studies that conducted similar analyses of health-related YouTube content [7,19,20]. A new YouTube (www.youtube.com) ...
... The selected videos were scored in a similar process implemented by previous studies [7,20]. All 73 videos were rated by two independent reviewers (BN, KW) in such a way that every video was scored twice. ...
... The like-to-dislike ratio (total number of likes/total number of dislikes) was calculated to judge community approval as seen in previous studies [20]. The view ratio (total number of views/days since upload) was also calculated to assess the video's popularity while correcting for the amount of time the video had been on the platform [19,25]. ...
Objective YouTube (YouTube LLC, San Bruno, California, United States), one of the most accessed sites on the internet, has become a widespread source of healthcare information for patients. Videos about coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG) have accrued tens of millions of views on the platform, yet their educational quality is unknown. This study investigates the educational landscape of videos regarding CABG procedures on YouTube. Methods YouTube was queried for "Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery" and "Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Procedure". After applying exclusion criteria, 73 videos were assessed. Two independent reviewers rated the material with the Global Quality Scale (GQS) (5 = high quality, 0 = low quality) to judge educational value. A ratio of view count to days since upload was applied to assess video popularity. Source, modality, and date of upload were recorded for each video as well. Results An average GQS score of 2.94 was found, indicating poor educational quality of the 73 YouTube videos on CABG procedures. Videos uploaded by physicians (56/73; 76.7%) had a significantly higher average GQS score than those uploaded by non-physicians (p<0.001). When content was grouped by delivery method, physician-led presentations (24/73 or 32.9%) produced the highest average GQS score of 3.35; conversely, patient-friendly delivery methods (18/73 or 24.7%) yielded the lowest average GQS score of 2.36 (p<0.001). Neither the view ratio nor the days since upload significantly correlated with the educational quality of the video. Conclusion Although CABG videos are readily available on YouTube, they often contain considerable biases and misleading information. With online sources for healthcare education now commonplace, physicians must be aware of the vast quantities of low-quality videos patients often encounter when weighing different treatment options. Further analysis of CABG videos on YouTube may allow physicians to ameliorate this gap by producing videos that are not only high quality but highly viewed on the platform.
... It has been proven many times in the literature that search engines on YouTube and the internet give incorrect results in various medical conditions to a large extent and can mislead people at a high rate. [12][13][14] However, the fact that ChatGPT has correct data at hand and as revealed in our study, unlike other internet sites where unproven people can easily generate content, it reaches correct data at a higher rate and even achieves success in exams that doctors enter, suggests it can be used as a more reliable source of consultation. In addition, the ability to provide quick and ready answers to the question asked is another significant advantage over known web sites. ...
In our study, we aimed to evaluate the success of ChatGPT by determining its performance in the last 5 medical specialty exams (MSE) conducted and its ranking among the candidates of that year, and to determine its potential use in healthcare services. Publicly available MSE questions and answer keys from the last 5 years were scanned, a total of 1177 questions were included in the study, all questions were asked to the ChatGPT (OpenAI; San Francisco, CA) GPT-3.5 series, which is the March 23, 2023 version. The average score and rank that ChatGPT would receive if it had entered the exam that year were determined. Questions were categorized as short question group, long question group, single select multiple-choice questions, and multi-select multiple-choice questions. The lowest success proportion was determined as 54.3%, and the highest success proportion was 70.9% correct answer percentage. It achieved a sufficient result as 1787th out of 22,214 people in its most successful exam, and 4428th out of 21,476 participants in its least successful one. No statistically significant difference was found between the correct answers it gave to clinical and basic science questions (P: .66). ChatGPT statistically significantly answered a higher proportion of questions correctly in the short questions group compared to the long questions group (P = .03), and in the single select multiple choice questions group compared to the multi-select multiple choice questions group (P < .001). ChatGPT has been successful in the MSE, a challenging exam for doctors in our country. However, it is a fact that ChatGPT is still behind the expert in the field for now, and what will happen with program developments in the future is a matter of curiosity for all of us.
... Although the ease of access to information on YouTube is an attractive feature of the platform, the lack of regulated content and peer/peer review may expose parents to inaccurate or insufficient content (YouTube, 2022). Previous studies of YouTube videos on children's health classified these videos as low or moderate in terms of their quality and reliability (Duman, 2020;Oh & You, 2021;Oztermeli & Karahan, 2020). In the national and international literature, no scientific study appears to have analyzed the content quality of YouTube videos that provide information about complementary feeding. ...
YouTube is an online platform that parents frequently use to access information on child health. Parents' watching YouTube videos to have information on complementary feeding requires evaluation of the videos regarding child health. This study which was conducted in descriptive design, aimed to analyze YouTube videos' content quality and reliability on complementary feeding. Searched by matching keywords "starting", "beginning", "introducing", "solid food", and "complementary feeding" through boolean operators in the English language on YouTube, on August 2022. The search identified 528 videos related to complementary feeding. Two independent researchers analyzed the content of 61 videos that met the inclusion criteria. The content quality of the videos was evaluated using the Checklist for Complementary Feeding (CCF), which was prepared by researchers in line with international guidelines, the reliability of the videos was analyzed using the DISCERN, and the content quality was evaluated using the Global Quality Score (GQS). Of the 61 videos included, 38 (62.3%) were informative, and 23 (37.7%) were misleading. The kappa value among independent observers was 0.96. The mean GQS, DISCERN, and CCF scores of the videos grouped as informative were significantly higher than the videos grouped as misleading (p = 0.000, p = 0.000, p = 0.000, respectively). There was a significant difference between the mean scores of GQS and DISCERN according to the publication source of the videos (p = 0.033 and p = 0.023, respectively). The GQS and DISCERN mean scores of the Ministrial/Academic/Hospital/Healthcare Institution channel videos were higher than the mean scores of the Individual/Parents content channel videos. Videos on YouTube about complementary feeding have high viewing rates, but also videos that are low in terms of quality and reliability.
... All referred studies concluded that the informative/educational quality and reliability of YouTube videos were poor. [19][20][21][22][23][24] Among a large number of studies, we did not find any study that analyzed YouTube content concerning HTO. ...
... Cassidy et al. 10 showed that neither the video quality or source, nor the number of views had no correlation with the recorded scores. Other studies [22][23][24] stated that video content uploaded by medical professionals/ academicians had higher informative quality and reliability. A study that analyzed video content quality on YouTube concerning Bankart lesion and its treatment showed that there was no difference in DISCERN or JAMA scores according to video type. ...
... Öztermeli ve Karahan'ın yaptığı çalışmaya benzer şekilde çalışmamızda videoların büyük çoğunluğunun (%31.3) sağlık personeli/sağlık kuruluşu tarafından yüklenmiş olduğu saptanmıştır (39). En fazla görüntülenen videoların ticari kuruluşlar tarafından yüklenen videolar olduğu ve en popüler videoların en yüksek izlenme oranına sahip olan bireysel kullanıcılar tarafından yüklenen videolar olduğu görülmüştür. ...
... Ayrıca oluşturduğumuz skorlama sisteminin de güvenilir olduğunu vurgulamaktadır. Bunun yanında Öztermeli ve Karahan'ın yaptığı çalışmaya benzer şekilde JAMA ile GQS veya YFASS arasında bir ilişki görülmemiştir (39). JAMA videoların içerdiği bilgilerin kalitesinden ziyade bilgi kaynağının kalitesini değerlendiren bir ölçektir. ...
Amaç: Bu çalışma, YouTube'daki yaşlılarda fiziksel aktivite ile ilgili videoların popülerlik, içerik, güvenilirlik ve bilgi kalitesi açısından araştırmak için tasarlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: İki bağımsız araştırmacı tarafından, 3 Eylül 2022’de YouTube'da yaşlılarda fiziksel aktivite ile ilgili “yaşlılarda fiziksel aktivite”, “yaşlılarda egzersiz” ve “yaşlılarda spor” anahtar kelimeleri kullanılarak sistematik bir tarama yapıldı. Her bir anahtar kelime için 50 video değerlendirildi. Video kaynağı, yüklemeden bu yana geçen süre, video süresi, görüntülenme ve beğeni sayısı gibi nicel özellikler kaydedildi. Video popülerliği, izlenme oranı kullanılarak belirlendi. Videoların kalitesi ve bilgi içeriği Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Küresel Kalite Skalası (Global Quality Scale, GQS) ve Yaşlılarda Fiziksel Aktivite Skorlama Sistemi (YFASS) kullanılarak ölçüldü. Bulgular: Videoların JAMA, GQS ve YFASS skorları sırasıyla 1.93±0.50, 1.62±1.07 ve 4.59±3.77’dir. Videoların büyük çoğunluğunun (n=25, %78.1)bilgi içeriğinin düşük düzeyde olduğu görülmüştür. En fazla izlenme oranına sahip videoların bireysel kullanıcılar tarafından yüklenenler olduğu gösterildi. Videoların büyük çoğunluğunun (%56) fiziksel aktivitenin faydaları ile ilgili bilgi içerdiği fakat çok az bir kısmında (%9) fiziksel aktivite düzeyi ile ilgili bilgi olduğu gözlendi. GQS ile YFASS arasında yüksek derecede pozitif korelasyon olduğu görülmüştür (p
... 6,7,9,10 Several studies have evaluated YouTube content in various medical topics. 7,[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] However, videos shared on YouTube are not subjected to peer-reviewing and the accuracy and reliability of the health information on YouTube are questionable. 7,9,10,23 Inaccurate and poor quality health information can be misleading and harmful to both patients and health care professionals. ...
... VPI was calculated using the formula: [number of likes/ (number of likes + dislikes)] · 100 16,17 and the VI was calculated using the formula: [(number of likesnumber of dislikes)/number of views]. 9,18,19 As the videos were uploaded on different dates, the VR was calculated by dividing the number of views by the number of days since the video was uploaded. ...
... 12,[17][18][19] Similar to our study, highest scores of reliability and quality were observed in videos uploaded by health professionals from academic institutions. [11][12][13][14][15][16][17]21,22 In addition, the provided information by the patients may have a risk of misleading the public and patients with lipedema as they are less reliable than the videos uploaded by health-professionals. 23,24 These and our studies have shown the information to have variable quality and reliability according to the topics. ...
Background/Aim: YouTube provides information on several health-conditions including lipedema. The aim of this study was to investigate the properties, quality, and quantity of YouTube videos on lipedema. Methods: We explored YouTube using the key word lipedema and the initial top 50 videos were included to review. The properties comprising informers, target, and domains of videos covering number of views, likes, dislikes, duration, viewing rate (VR), and video power index (VPI) were recorded. A modified DISCERN tool and global quality scale (GQS) were used to assess the reliability and quality of videos, respectively. Results: The top 50 videos had a mean of 35,805 views, 282 likes, 12 dislikes, and 30 comments. The mean VPI (96.4) and VR (63.8%) were high. The videos were generally uploaded by health professionals for patient/public and health professional targets with the same ratio (50%). The majority of video contents was related to general information (68%) followed by surgical treatment (62%). Only a small ratio of their content (22%) was about nonsurgical management. The reliability and quality of the videos were intermediate to low. The median DISCERN and GQS scores were higher in the videos uploaded by health professional group compared with nonhealth professionals, but the number of views, VPI, and VR were similar between the groups with regard to the source. Conclusion: YouTube videos on lipedema are mostly provided by health professionals targeting both public/patients and health care providers but the content is limited and the quality and reliability of them were low to intermediate. Therefore, the lipedema specialists are suggested to work together to create up-to-date, high-quality, accessible online educational content to meet the needs of both patients/public and the health professionals. In addition, control mechanisms and careful peer reviewing of the videos informed by nonhealth professionals are warranted to avoid misleading information.
... Thus, in the present study, the quality of the content of the most viewed videos on YouTube in Brazil about cervical cancer was evaluated. [48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62] Methodology This is a descriptive observational study with the objective of analyzing the content of videos on the "YouTube" platform about cervical cancer. The videos were downloaded in April 2021 from the search descriptors "cervical cancer" applying the "most viewed" filter. ...
Cervical cancer is a major cause of preventable death in women. Health education strategies on preventive and protective methods are decisive for health promotion. In view of the popularity of the YouTube platform, this study evaluated 169 most viewed videos, selected based on the keyword "cervical cancer" in Brazil. These were downloaded and transcribed and analyzed for technical information and content analysis compared to information from the World Health Organization. Most of the analyzed videos are short; posted by laypeople (37.9%) and widely viewed (1,400 to more than 62,000). Although the majority try to disseminate information content, more than 58.9% do not cover the definition of cervical cancer, its risk factors (80.47%), signs and symptoms (68.64%), primary prevention (68.5%) and tertiary prevention (74.56%). Secondary prevention was addressed in 49.70%, but only 1.2% with correct and complete information. In general, 57.4% of the videos were rated as bad or very bad, pointing to the low quality of information about cervical cancer prevention on YouTube in Brazil. In conclusion, YouTube has been used in Brazil to discuss important issues about cervical cancer, but the quality of the video content is quite limited.
... Ülkemizde yapılmış gelişimsel kalça çıkığı ve ön çapraz bağ ile ilgili YouTube videolarının güvenirliliğini değerlendiren çalışmalar mevcuttur 5,6 . Ancak YouTube'da ortopedi ve travmatoloji alanında PEV deformitesine ilişkin bilgilerin ne kadar güvenilir olduğunu gösteren yayına rastlamadık. ...
Objective: Due to the widespread use of technology and especially the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients refer to the Internet at the first stage to access health. YouTube, a popular social media network, is an inexpensive and easily accessible videosharing platform that does not have a reliable monitoring mechanism used to create and distribute information. Our study aims to examine the reliability, validity, and scope of the videos presented on YouTube on pes equinovarus.
Methods: In July 2021, the top 50 most-watched videos for relevance in a YouTube search for the terms "clubfoot deformity" and "pes equinovarus" were rated independently by two authors. For each video, web link, title, number of views, duration, publication date, number of likes, dislikes and comments, content producer (physician, non-physician healthcare professional, patient, commercial, other), content (educational, surgical technique, patient experience, advertisement, other) was noted. The reliability and validity of the videos were determined by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) criteria and for YouTube the modified DISCERN criteria. The diagnosis and treatment of pes equinovarus were evaluated with a coverage
score in the available YouTube videos. The relationship between variables and evaluation scores was tested with Spearman correlation.
Results: Interobserver reliability was good for JAMA, DISCERN, and coverage scores (correlation coefficient: 0.91; 0.96; 0.98). There is a moderately strong positive correlation between JAMA criteria and duration (p
