Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Front Public Health. 2022 Jul 11;10:925691. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.925691. eCollection 2022.
Patients utilize the internet as a pathway to acquire knowledge of specific diseases. However, there are limited oversight and review mechanisms to ensure the authenticity of online information. This study aimed to evaluate the quality of video-based resources used to obtain information about atrial fibrillation (AF).
Multiple AF-specific keywords were used to perform a systematic search of YouTube. Two independent reviewers reviewed the top 50 results of each keyword search. To record data, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) score, modified DISCERN score, AF-specific score (AFSS), and essential score (Escore) were used. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for intergroup comparisons.
A total of 74 videos that met the inclusion criteria were included in the analysis. In terms of video quality, 68% were poor, 19% were moderate, and 13% were exceptional. Videos submitted by publishers with a medical background were much less popular ( < 0.05) than those submitted by publishers without a medical background. The video quality did not differ among those included in this study.
Some videos on YouTube that are of real value are not as popular as those with low-quality content submitted by news agencies/media publishers. Furthermore, videos submitted by those with a medical background do not receive as much attention as others. It is important to acknowledge that video platforms should establish content and quality auditing mechanisms for videos. Furthermore, publishers should ensure that viewers receive accurate and complete knowledge and use more concise and accessible images or animations that are tailored to the audience.
患者利用互联网获取特定疾病的知识。然而,为确保在线信息的真实性,目前仅存在有限的监督和审查机制。本研究旨在评估用于获取心房颤动(AF)信息的基于视频的资源的质量。
使用多个 AF 特定关键字对 YouTube 进行系统搜索。两名独立评审员对每个关键字搜索的前 50 个结果进行了评审。为记录数据,使用了《美国医学会杂志》(JAMA)评分、改良 DISCERN 评分、AF 特定评分(AFSS)和基本评分(Escore)。使用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验进行组间比较。
共纳入 74 个符合纳入标准的视频进行分析。就视频质量而言,68%为差,19%为中,13%为优。有医学背景的发布者提交的视频(<0.05)比没有医学背景的发布者提交的视频不那么受欢迎。本研究纳入的视频质量没有差异。
YouTube 上一些有真正价值的视频不如新闻机构/媒体发布者发布的低质量内容的视频受欢迎。此外,有医学背景的发布者提交的视频不如其他视频受到关注。重要的是要认识到视频平台应为视频建立内容和质量审核机制。此外,发布者应确保观众获得准确和完整的知识,并使用更简洁和易于理解的图像或动画,以适应受众。