The quality and content analysis of YouTube videos about chemotherapy for children
Purpose This study undertook a systematic examination of YouTube videos about chemotherapy for pediatric patients, with a primary focus on assessing the videos' quality, content, and reliability. Method The research was conducted by searching YouTube using the keywords “chemotherapy for childre...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Pediatric blood & cancer 2024-04, Vol.71 (4), p.e30865-n/a |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Purpose
This study undertook a systematic examination of YouTube videos about chemotherapy for pediatric patients, with a primary focus on assessing the videos' quality, content, and reliability.
Method
The research was conducted by searching YouTube using the keywords “chemotherapy for children” and “chemotherapy for pediatric,” employing filters for “worldwide” and “all categories.” The top 100 videos, based on popularity, were selected for evaluation according to the power analysis calculation. Two independent experts in pediatric oncology reviewed these videos. Video characteristics were recorded: length, view count, likes, dislikes, view ratio, and video‐like ratio. The Video Power Index was calculated to measure video popularity. The modified DISCERN and Global Quality Scale (GQS) assessed the videos for quality and reliability.
Results
The 100 videos were analyzed. Official health institutions uploaded 54%, while independent users contributed 46%. Independent user uploads garnered significantly more views than official health institutions (p = .006). The number of likes, view ratio, and Video Power Index of independent users’ videos were significantly higher than official health institutions’ videos (respectively, p = .007, .007, and .008). On the other hand, the modified DISCERN score and GQS were significantly higher in YouTube videos of official health institutions than in independent users (p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1545-5009 1545-5017 |
DOI: | 10.1002/pbc.30865 |