University Hospital Jena, Jena, Germany.
University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany.
Integr Cancer Ther. 2024 Jan-Dec;23:15347354241293417. doi: 10.1177/15347354241293417.
The global burden of cancer continues to rise and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is attracting a lot of interest. However, quality of online information on CAM, particularly on platforms like YouTube, remains questionable. This study aimed to create a comprehensive assessment tool to assess the quality of CAM-related YouTube videos, crucial for informed decision-making in oncology.
The assessment tool was developed by adapting existing criteria for website content analysis to video rating. A YouTube search was conducted using German-language terms related to CAM ("complementary medicine (CM) for cancer" and "alternative medicine (AM) for cancer"). In total 25 videos were assessed based on the defined criteria and assigned to five different types of providers (journalism, healthcare organization, hospital or health insurance, independent person, non-medical organization). Statistical analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 27.
Interrater reliability analysis showed an Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) of .91, indicating good to excellent agreement. The average video result was of poor quality, with none of the videos meeting all criteria. The videos achieved a mean rating of 38.2 points (SD: 6.5 points; possible range: 20-60 points). Journalism-based videos showed the most views per days, particularly surpassing those from hospitals or health insurance providers (Kruskal-Wallis-Test: = 3.14, = .02). However, there was no statistically significant correlation between video quality and the type of provider or interaction indices. Videos retrieved under the search term "CM" generally scored higher in quality than those under "AM" (Mann-Whitney U test: = 39.5, = .04). Nonetheless, "CM" videos were less frequently viewed (Mann-Whitney U test: = 31.0, = .01).
This study, the first of its kind focusing on CAM in cancer care emphasized the challenges in identifying credible sources on social media platforms such as YouTube. The developed assessment tool offers a more detailed evaluation method for health-related videos but requires further refinement and testing. Collaboration between healthcare and media entities is suggested to improve the dissemination of reliable information on platforms like YouTube.
全球癌症负担持续上升，补充和替代医学（CAM）越来越受到关注。然而，在线 CAM 信息的质量，特别是在 YouTube 等平台上，仍然值得怀疑。本研究旨在创建一个全面的评估工具，以评估与 CAM 相关的 YouTube 视频的质量，这对于肿瘤学中的知情决策至关重要。
该评估工具是通过将现有的网站内容分析标准改编为视频评级来开发的。使用德语术语“癌症的补充医学（CM）”和“癌症的替代医学（AM）”在 YouTube 上进行了搜索。总共评估了 25 个视频，根据定义的标准将它们分为五种不同类型的提供者（新闻媒体、医疗机构、医院或健康保险公司、独立人士、非医疗机构）。使用 IBM SPSS Statistics 27 进行了统计分析。
评分者间信度分析显示，组内相关系数（ICC）为.91，表明具有良好到极好的一致性。平均视频结果质量较差，没有一个视频符合所有标准。视频的平均评分为 38.2 分（标准差：6.5 分；可能范围：20-60 分）。基于新闻媒体的视频每天的浏览量最高，特别是超过了医院或健康保险公司的视频（Kruskal-Wallis 检验： = 3.14， = .02）。然而，视频质量与提供者类型或交互指标之间没有统计学上的显著相关性。在搜索词“CM”下检索到的视频质量普遍高于在“AM”下检索到的视频（Mann-Whitney U 检验： = 39.5， = .04）。尽管如此，“CM”视频的浏览量较低（Mann-Whitney U 检验： = 31.0， = .01）。
本研究首次关注癌症护理中的 CAM，强调了在社交媒体平台（如 YouTube）上识别可信来源的挑战。所开发的评估工具为健康相关视频提供了更详细的评估方法，但需要进一步的改进和测试。建议医疗保健和媒体实体之间进行合作，以改善在 YouTube 等平台上可靠信息的传播。
