Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of YouTube Videos on Polymyalgia Rheumatica
Author:
YETİŞİR Ayşegül1ORCID, SARIYILDIZ Aylin2ORCID
Affiliation:
1. Çukurova Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Fiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyon Anabilim Dalı, Romatoloji Bilim Dalı 2. Çukurova Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Fiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyon Anabilim Dalı
Abstract
To investigate polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR)-related YouTube videos’ quality and reliability. We searched the term “polymyalgia rheumatica” on https://www.youtube.com. The most viewed 60 YouTube videos about PMR were analyzed by two independent physiatrists. Study data used in the analysis included upload date, total views, number of likes and comments, length of video, contents of video, source of the uploader, and targeted population. The Global Quality Scale (GQS) and the Modified DISCERN tool were used to assess PMR-related video quality and reliability, respectively. Comparative analyses of video features, quality, and reliability were performed based on source of uploaders (professional and non-professional) and GQS score subgroups. Of the videos analyzed, 76.7% and 61.7% of the uploaded videos were related to symptoms and treatment, respectively, and 65% of the videos were uploaded by healthcare professionals. The median GQS and modified DISCERN tool scores were 3 in professionals and 2 in non-professionals (p< 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). According to the GQS score, there was no significant difference in terms of total views, number of likes, number of comments, and view ratio values between low, moderate, and high quality videos. 35% of the YouTube videos concerning PMR were uploaded by non-professionals with poor reliability and quality. Therefore, healthcare professionals need to produce videos that provide more accurate and high quality information about PMR on this platform. Before being published, YouTube videos should be evaluated objectively for the accurity of their content.
Publisher
Osmangazi Journal of Medicine
Reference25 articles.
1. 1. Lundberg I E, Sharma A, Turesson C, Mohammad AJ. An update on polymyalgia rheumatica. J Intern Med 2022;292:717–732. 2. 2. Colombo MG, Wetzel AJ, Haumann H, Dally S, Kirtschig G, Joos S. Polymyalgia Rheumatica Dtsch Arztebl Int 2022;119:411–417. 3. 3. Castañeda S, García-Castañeda N, Prieto-Peña D, Martínez-Quintanilla D, Vicente EF, Blanco R, González-Gay MA. Treatment of polymyalgia rheumatica. Biochem pharmacol 2019;165:221–229. 4. 4. Dasgupta B, Cimmino MA, Kremers HM, Schmidt WA, Schirmer M, Salvarani C, Bachta A, Dejaco C, Duftner C, Jensen HS, Duhaut P, Poór G, Kaposi NP, Mandl P, Balint PV, Schmidt Z, Iagnocco A, Nannini C, Cantini F, Macchioni P, Pipitone N, Del Amo M, Espígol-Frigolé G, Cid MC, Martínez-Taboada VM, Nordborg E, Direskeneli H, Aydin SZ, Ahmed K, Hazleman B, Silverman B, Pease C, Wakefield RJ, Luqmani R, Abril A, Michet CJ, Marcus R, Gonter NJ, Maz M, Carter RE, Crowson CS, Matteson EL. 2012 Provisional classification criteria for polymyalgia rheumatica: a European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology collaborative initiative. Arthritis rheum 2012;64:943–954. 5. 5. Camellino D, Giusti A, Girasole G, Bianchi G, Dejaco C. Pathogenesis, Diagnosis and Management of Polymyalgia Rheumatica. Drugs aging 2019;36:1015–1026.
|
|