Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Kornea nakli konusunda YouTube videoları ne kadar güvenilir bilgi sağlıyor?

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 28 Sayı: 1, 89 - 94, 20.01.2023
https://doi.org/10.21673/anadoluklin.1176568

Öz

Amaç: YouTube üzerinden yayınlanan videolarda kornea nakli hakkında verilen bilgilerin ne denli güvenilir olduğunu değerlendirmek.

Yöntemler: YouTube üzerinden video arama motoruna “kornea nakli” yazıldıktan sonra ekranda beliren ilk 100 video 04.03.2022 tarihinde listelenmiştir. Yükleme tarihi, yayın süresi, toplam izlenme sayısı, günlük izlenme oranı, video kaynağı ve süresi (saniye), beğeni ve yorum sayısı kaydedilen parametrelerdi. İki oftalmolog, videoları Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information (DISCERN), Global Quality (GQ) endekslerini kullanarak körü körüne ve bağımsız olarak değerlendirdi ve puanladı.

Bulgular: Videoların kaynağı değerlendirildiğinde, 10 videonun göz hastalıkları uzmanı tarafından yüklendiği, 35 videonun televizyon programından belli bir bölüm içerdiği, 14 videonun herhangi bir sağlık kuruluşu ve 22 videonun ise diğer kaynaklar tarafından yüklendiği tespit edilmiştir. Kaynağı televizyon programı olan videoların süresinin anlamlı olarak (p<0.05) daha uzun olduğu izlenmiştir. DISCERN sınıflandırmasına göre videoların %21’i “çok zayıf”, %45.7’si “zayıf”, %17.3’ü “orta”, %13.6’sı “iyi”, %2.5’i “mükemmel” idi. DISCERN sınıflandırması ve video süresi (p<0.01) ile video beğenisi (p=0.013) arasında anlamlı fark olduğu görüldü. Kaynaklara göre DISCERN, JAMA, GQ skorları değerlendirildiğinde anlamlı bir fark olmadığı görüldü. Beğeni sayısı, görüntülenme sayısı, görüntülenme oranı ve videodaki yorum sayıları arasında yüksek korelasyon olduğu tespit edilmiştir (p<0.01).

Sonuç: YouTube sağlık alanında sıkça bilgi kaynağı olarak kullanılan bir platformdur ve kornea nakli ile ilgili önemli ölçüde içerik mevcuttur. Ancak bu içeriklerin yüksek oranda çok zayıf kalitede olduğu tespit edildi. Çoğu hastanın tek bilgi kaynağı olarak YouTube’u baz alabildiği unutulmamalı bu nedenle içeriklerin yüksek kalitede, güncel ve doğru olması gerektiği göz önüne alınmalıdır.

Teşekkür

Doç. Dr. Kadriye AVCI’ya en içten şükranlarımızı sunuyoruz.

Kaynakça

  • Amante DJ, Hogan TP, Pagoto SL, English TM, Lapane KL. Access to care and use of the Internet to search for health information: results from the US National Health Interview Survey. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(4):e106.
  • Wikipedia [İnternet]. List of most popular websites. Erişim tarihi: 3 Nisan 2021, Erişim linki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_visited_websites.
  • Langford A. Loeb S. Perceived patient-provider communication quality and sociodemographic factors associated with watching health-related videos on YouTube: a crosssectional analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(5):13512.
  • Koller U, Waldstein W, Schatz KD, Windhager R. YouTube provides irrelevant information for the diagnosis and treatment of hip arthritis. Int Orthop. 2016;40(10):1995-2002.
  • Wong K, Doong J, Trang T, Joo S, Chien AL. YouTube Videos on Botulinum Toxin A for Wrinkles: A Useful Resource for Patient Education. Dermatol Surg. 2017;43(12):1466-73.
  • Gokcen HB, Gumussuyu G. A quality analysis of disc herniation videos on YouTube. World Neurosurg. 2019:S1878-8750(19)30246-3.
  • Picetti B, Fine M. Keratoplasty in children. Am J Ophthalmol 1966;61(4):782-9.
  • Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis--a wakeup call?. J Rheumatol. 2012;39(5):899-903.
  • Silberg WM. Lundberg GD. Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: caveat lector et viewordlet the reader and viewer beware. JAMA. 1997;277(15):1244-5.
  • Weil AG, Bojanowski MW, Jamart J, Gustin T, Lévêque M. Evaluation of the quality of information on the Internet available to patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. World Neurosurg. 2014;82(1-2):e31-9.
  • Ozsoy-Unubol T, Alanbay-Yagci E. YouTube as a source of information on fibromyalgia. Int J Rheum Dis. 2021;24(2):197-202.
  • Ozdemir Zeydanli E, Alkan AA. Era of “Dr. YouTube”: Evaluation of YouTube Videos as a Valid Source for Patient Education on Keratoconus. Eye Contact Lens. 2021;47(9):526-32.
  • Songur MS, Citirik M. Evaluation of the Usefulness of YouTube Videos on Retinal Detachment Surgery. Cureus. 2021;13(11):e19457.
  • Kalayci M, Cetinkaya E, Suren E, Yigit K, Erol MK. Are YouTube Videos Useful in Informing Patients about Keratoplasty?. Semin Ophthalmol. 2021;36(7):469-74.
  • Yildiz MB, Yildiz E, Balci S, Özçelik Köse A. Evaluation of the Quality, Reliability, and Educational Content of YouTube Videos as an Information Source for Soft Contact Lenses. Eye Contact Lens. 2021;47(11):617-21.
  • Bae SS, Baxter S. YouTube videos in the English language as a patient education resource for cataract surgery. Int Ophthalmol. 2018;38(5):1941-5.
  • Gabarron E, Fernandez-Luque L, Armayones M, Lau AY. Identifying Measures Used for Assessing Quality of YouTube Videos with Patient Health Information: A Review of Current Literature. Interact J Med Res. 2013;2(1):e6.
  • Pamukçu M, İzci Duran T, Gut hastalığı hakkında bilgi kaynağı olarak YouTube: Kesitsel değerlendirme. Türkiye

To what extent are YouTube videos reliable for corneal transplantation information?

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 28 Sayı: 1, 89 - 94, 20.01.2023
https://doi.org/10.21673/anadoluklin.1176568

Öz

Aim: To assess the reliability of corneal transplantation information in YouTube videos.

Methods: The first 100 videos that appeared on the screen after typing “cornea transplant” into YouTube’s video search engine were listed on 04.03.2022. Upload date, broadcasting time, total views, daily view rate, video source and length (seconds), and number of likes and comments made were all recorded parameters. Two ophthalmologists evaluated and scored the videos blindly and independently using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information (DISCERN), Global Quality (GQ) indices.

Results: When the source of the videos was evaluated, it was determined that 10 videos were uploaded by an ophthalmologist, 35 videos included a certain episode from a television program, 14 videos were uploaded by a health institution and 22 videos were uploaded by other sources. It was observed that the duration of the videos, whose source is television programs, was significantly (p<0.05) longer. According to the DISCERN classification, 21% of the videos are “very weak”, 45.7% “poor”, 17.3% “moderate”, 13.6% “good”, 2.5% “excellent” was. There was a significant difference between DISCERN classification and video duration (p<0.01) and video likes (p=0.013). According to the sources, there was no significant difference when the DISCERN, JAMA, and GQ scores were evaluated. It has been determined that there is a high correlation between the number of likes, the number of views, the rate of viewing and the number of comments on the video (p<0.01).

Conclusion: YouTube is a platform that is frequently used as a source of information in the field of health and there is a significant amount of content about corneal transplantation. It has been determined that these ingredients are very weak and of poor quality at a high rate. It should not be forgotten that most patients rely on YouTube as the only source of information, so it should be considered that the content should be of high quality, up-to-date and accurate.

Kaynakça

  • Amante DJ, Hogan TP, Pagoto SL, English TM, Lapane KL. Access to care and use of the Internet to search for health information: results from the US National Health Interview Survey. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(4):e106.
  • Wikipedia [İnternet]. List of most popular websites. Erişim tarihi: 3 Nisan 2021, Erişim linki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_visited_websites.
  • Langford A. Loeb S. Perceived patient-provider communication quality and sociodemographic factors associated with watching health-related videos on YouTube: a crosssectional analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(5):13512.
  • Koller U, Waldstein W, Schatz KD, Windhager R. YouTube provides irrelevant information for the diagnosis and treatment of hip arthritis. Int Orthop. 2016;40(10):1995-2002.
  • Wong K, Doong J, Trang T, Joo S, Chien AL. YouTube Videos on Botulinum Toxin A for Wrinkles: A Useful Resource for Patient Education. Dermatol Surg. 2017;43(12):1466-73.
  • Gokcen HB, Gumussuyu G. A quality analysis of disc herniation videos on YouTube. World Neurosurg. 2019:S1878-8750(19)30246-3.
  • Picetti B, Fine M. Keratoplasty in children. Am J Ophthalmol 1966;61(4):782-9.
  • Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis--a wakeup call?. J Rheumatol. 2012;39(5):899-903.
  • Silberg WM. Lundberg GD. Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: caveat lector et viewordlet the reader and viewer beware. JAMA. 1997;277(15):1244-5.
  • Weil AG, Bojanowski MW, Jamart J, Gustin T, Lévêque M. Evaluation of the quality of information on the Internet available to patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. World Neurosurg. 2014;82(1-2):e31-9.
  • Ozsoy-Unubol T, Alanbay-Yagci E. YouTube as a source of information on fibromyalgia. Int J Rheum Dis. 2021;24(2):197-202.
  • Ozdemir Zeydanli E, Alkan AA. Era of “Dr. YouTube”: Evaluation of YouTube Videos as a Valid Source for Patient Education on Keratoconus. Eye Contact Lens. 2021;47(9):526-32.
  • Songur MS, Citirik M. Evaluation of the Usefulness of YouTube Videos on Retinal Detachment Surgery. Cureus. 2021;13(11):e19457.
  • Kalayci M, Cetinkaya E, Suren E, Yigit K, Erol MK. Are YouTube Videos Useful in Informing Patients about Keratoplasty?. Semin Ophthalmol. 2021;36(7):469-74.
  • Yildiz MB, Yildiz E, Balci S, Özçelik Köse A. Evaluation of the Quality, Reliability, and Educational Content of YouTube Videos as an Information Source for Soft Contact Lenses. Eye Contact Lens. 2021;47(11):617-21.
  • Bae SS, Baxter S. YouTube videos in the English language as a patient education resource for cataract surgery. Int Ophthalmol. 2018;38(5):1941-5.
  • Gabarron E, Fernandez-Luque L, Armayones M, Lau AY. Identifying Measures Used for Assessing Quality of YouTube Videos with Patient Health Information: A Review of Current Literature. Interact J Med Res. 2013;2(1):e6.
  • Pamukçu M, İzci Duran T, Gut hastalığı hakkında bilgi kaynağı olarak YouTube: Kesitsel değerlendirme. Türkiye
Toplam 18 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Sağlık Kurumları Yönetimi
Bölüm ORJİNAL MAKALE
Yazarlar

Seray Yörükoğlu 0000-0001-6580-8674

İbrahim Ethem Ay 0000-0002-3468-7096

Hamidu Hamisi Gobeka 0000-0002-7656-3155

Mustafa Doğan 0000-0001-7237-9847

Yayımlanma Tarihi 20 Ocak 2023
Kabul Tarihi 31 Ekim 2022
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2023 Cilt: 28 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

Vancouver Yörükoğlu S, Ay İE, Gobeka HH, Doğan M. Kornea nakli konusunda YouTube videoları ne kadar güvenilir bilgi sağlıyor?. Anadolu Klin. 2023;28(1):89-94.

13151 This Journal licensed under a CC BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0) International License.