Smith Peter E, McGuire James, Falci Michael, Poudel Dilli Ram, Kaufman Richard, Patterson Mary Ann, Pelleschi Benjamin, Shin Esther
J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2019 Mar;109(2):122-126. doi: 10.7547/16-149.
Increasing amounts of diabetes-focused content is being posted to YouTube with little regulation as to the quality of the content. Diabetic education has been shown to reduce the risk of ulceration and amputation. YouTube is a frequently visited site for instructional and demonstrational videos posted by individuals, advertisers, companies, and health-care organizations. We sought to evaluate the usefulness of diabetic foot care video information on YouTube.
YouTube was queried using the keyword phrase . Original videos in English, with audio, less than 10 min long within the first 100 video results were evaluated. Two reviewers classified each video as useful or nonuseful/misleading. A 14-point usefulness criteria checklist was used to further categorize videos as most useful, somewhat useful, or nonuseful/misleading. Video sources were categorized by user type, and additional video metrics were collected.
Of 87 included videos, 56 (64.4%), were classified as useful and 31 (35.6%) as nonuseful/misleading. A significant difference in the mean length of useful videos vs nonuseful/misleading videos was observed (3.33 versus 1.73 min; < .0001). There was no significant difference in terms of popularity metrics (likes, views, subscriptions, etc) between useful and nonuseful/misleading videos.
This study demonstrates that although most diabetic foot care videos on YouTube are useful, many are still nonuseful/misleading. More concerning is the lack of difference in popularity between useful and nonuseful videos. Podiatric physicians should alert patients to possibly misleading information and offer a curated list of videos.
越来越多以糖尿病为主题的内容被发布到YouTube上,而对内容质量的监管却很少。糖尿病教育已被证明可以降低溃疡和截肢的风险。YouTube是个人、广告商、公司和医疗保健组织发布教学和演示视频的热门网站。我们试图评估YouTube上糖尿病足护理视频信息的有用性。
使用关键词组在YouTube上进行查询。对前100个视频结果中时长不到10分钟、配有音频的英文原创视频进行评估。两名评审员将每个视频分类为有用或无用/误导性。使用一份包含14个要点的有用性标准清单,将视频进一步分类为最有用、有些有用或无用/误导性。视频来源按用户类型分类,并收集其他视频指标。
在纳入的87个视频中,56个(64.4%)被分类为有用,31个(35.6%)被分类为无用/误导性。观察到有用视频与无用/误导性视频的平均时长存在显著差异(3.33分钟对1.73分钟;<0.0001)。有用视频和无用/误导性视频在人气指标(点赞、观看次数、订阅等)方面没有显著差异。
本研究表明,虽然YouTube上的大多数糖尿病足护理视频是有用的,但仍有许多是无用/误导性的。更令人担忧的是,有用视频和无用视频在人气方面没有差异。足病医生应提醒患者注意可能存在误导性的信息,并提供一份精心挑选的视频清单。