Suppr超能文献

[YouTube上勃起功能障碍信息质量分析。]

[Analysis of the quality of the information on the erectile dysfunction in YouTube.].

作者信息

Mazuecos Quirós Javier, Pedraza Sánchez José Pablo, Lozano Blasco José María, Baena Villamarín Cristina, Lendínez Cano Guillermo, Medina López Rafael Antonio

机构信息

Unidad de Andrología. UGC Urología-Nefrología. Instituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla. IBiS. Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío. CSIC. Universidad de Sevilla. Sevilla. España.

出版信息

Arch Esp Urol. 2020 Jul;73(6):541-545.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study is to stablish the scientific quality of the available information in YouTube about erectile dysfunction (ED).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We searched on YouTube thrree terms ("Problemas de Erección" (PE), "Impotencia"(I) y "Disfunción Eréctil" (DE)). The sixteen first videos from each term were selected for the analysis. Two independent urologists reviewed all videos and classified all of them in scientific evidence-based (SEB) or not scientific evidence-based (NSEB) according to the current literature. In the subgroup analysis we compare: number of visits, duration, time of publication, source and type of information.

RESULTS

After excluding the repeated links and non-concordant videos between both urologists, we analysed 147 videos. The Kappa statistic was 0.89 (95% CI0.85-0.96). 37% were considered SEB and 63% were considered NSEB. The median of reproductions in the SEB group was 24.356 (96-126.410) and 44.416 for NSEB (190-10.318.642); this difference was statistically significant. The median duration was 254 seconds(46-984) for the SEB group and 228 seconds for the NSEB (23-2.880); the median time of publication was 42 (16-103) months for the SEB group and 29 (11-134) months for the other one. 83% of SEB videos were published in health networks and television programs,while 58% of NSEB were published in user blogs. The SEB videos show more information about pathophysiology,aetiology, endothelial dysfunction, diagnosis and treatment than NSEB (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

37% of the videos were consideredSEB. The NSEB videos were significantly more playedthan SEB group.

摘要

目的

我们研究的目的是确定YouTube上有关勃起功能障碍(ED)的现有信息的科学质量。

材料与方法

我们在YouTube上搜索了三个术语(“Problemas de Erección”(PE)、“Impotencia”(I)和“Disfunción Eréctil”(DE))。从每个术语中选取前16个视频进行分析。两名独立的泌尿科医生对所有视频进行了审查,并根据当前文献将它们全部分类为基于科学证据(SEB)或非基于科学证据(NSEB)。在亚组分析中,我们比较了:访问次数、时长、发布时间、信息来源和类型。

结果

在排除重复链接和两位泌尿科医生之间不一致的视频后,我们分析了147个视频。Kappa统计量为0.89(95%CI 0.85 - 0.96)。37%被认为是SEB,63%被认为是NSEB。SEB组的播放量中位数为24356(96 - 126410),NSEB组为44416(190 - 10318642);这种差异具有统计学意义。SEB组的时长中位数为254秒(46 - 984),NSEB组为228秒(23 - 2880);SEB组的发布时间中位数为42(16 - 103)个月,另一组为29(11 - 134)个月。83%的SEB视频发布在健康网络和电视节目中,而58%的NSEB视频发布在用户博客中。与NSEB相比,SEB视频展示了更多关于病理生理学、病因学、内皮功能障碍、诊断和治疗的信息(p<0.001)。

结论

37%的视频被认为是SEB。NSEB视频的播放量明显高于SEB组。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验