Analysis of YouTube Videos on Circumcision: Evaluating Reliability and Quality for Patients and Parents


Abstract views: 194 / PDF downloads: 237

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther2250

Keywords:

Circumcision, YouTube™, Video analysis, Quality, Reliability

Abstract

Objective: Circumcision is a significant issue for child health and parents, and the reliability and quality of information published on platforms like YouTube can affect patients' access to accurate information. This study aimed to evaluate the quality and reliability of Turkish YouTube videos as a source of information about circumcision.

Methods: In this cross-sectional study, a search was conducted on YouTube using the keyword "circumcision" on June 1, 2024. After applying exclusion criteria, the 45 most viewed Turkish videos (more than 10,000 views) were included in the study. Videos that were irrelevant, contained advertisements, personal experiences, or were in languages other than Turkish were excluded. The duration, view count, likes, dislikes, number of comments, and upload date of the videos were recorded. The Video Power Index (VPI) was calculated to measure video popularity. Two pediatric surgeons independently assessed the quality and reliability of the videos using the Modified DISCERN (mDISCERN), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), and Global Quality Scale (GQS) scores. Scale scores were compared between groups based on the purpose and publisher of the video using the Mann-Whitney U test. Correlations between video characteristics and scale scores were evaluated with the Spearman correlation coefficient, and inter-observer agreement was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Results: According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 39 (86.7%) of the 45 videos were informational, and 6 (13.3%) were surgical. The average length of the videos was 213.5 ± 206 (35 - 1164) seconds. The average duration since the videos were published until June 1, 2024, was 1653 ± 980 (350 - 3985) days. The average view count of the videos was 73,862 ± 114,210 (11,736 – 679,985). The average Video Power Index of the videos was 39.9 ± 40.85 (3.69 - 247.1). The average mDISCERN score was 2.87 ± 1.24, the JAMA score was 2.71 ± 0.7, and the GQS score was 3.38 ± 1.19. According to the GQS scale, 22.3% (n=10) of the 45 videos were of low quality, 33.3% (n=15) were of medium quality, and 44.4% (n=20) were of high quality. All scale scores of informational videos were statistically significantly greater compared to the surgical videos (P=0.008, P=0.041, P=0.024, respectively).

Conclusion: YouTube is a significant source of information with the potential to influence the knowledge and behavior of a wide audience regarding circumcision. Patients and their relatives should consider videos uploaded by expert physicians. There is a need for more high-quality educational surgical circumcision videos and short, clear, unbiased, high-quality informational videos addressing controversial issues and containing necessary resources created by expert physicians. This will help increase the accurate knowledge of families about circumcision and consequently reduce unnecessary anxiety and expectations.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Morris BJ, Wamai RG, Henebeng EB, Tobian AA, Klausner JD, Banerjee J, et al. (2016) Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision. Population health metrics 14:4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5

Bar-Yaakov N, Mano R, Ekstein M, et al. (2022) Parental Regret Following Decision to Revise Circumcision. Frontiers in pediatrics 10:855893. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2022.855893

Weiss HA, Larke N, Halperin D, Schenker I (2010) Complications of circumcision in male neonates, infants and children: a systematic review. BMC urology 10:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2490-10-2

Pippi Salle JL, Jesus LE, Lorenzo AJ, Romão RL, Figueroa VH, et al (2013) Glans amputation during routine neonatal circumcision: mechanism of injury and strategy for prevention. Journal of pediatric urology 9:763–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2012.09.012

Ceylan K, Burhan K, Yilmaz Y, Can S, Kuş A, Mustafa G (2007) Severe complications of circumcision: an analysis of 48 cases. Journal of pediatric urology 3:32–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2006.02.009

Prabhakaran S, Ljuhar D, Coleman R, Nataraja RM (2018) Circumcision in the paediatric patient: A review of indications, technique and complications. Journal of paediatrics and child health, 54: 1299–1307. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpc.14206

Sturiale A, Dowais R, Porzio FC, et al. (2020) Youtube as a Source of Patients' and Specialists' Information on Hemorrhoids and Hemorrhoid Surgery. Reviews on recent clinical trials 15:219–226. https://doi.org/10.2174/1574887115666200525001619

Farsi D (2021) Social media and health care, part I: literature review of social media use by health care providers. Journal of medical internet research 23(4), e23205.

Jildeh TR, Okoroha KR, Guthrie ST, Parsons TW (2019) Social Media Use for Orthopaedic Surgeons. JBJS reviews 7: e7. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.18.00085

Patrick M, Venkatesh RD, Stukus DR (2022) Social media and its impact on health care. Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology 128:139-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anai.2021.09.014

Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK (2015) Healthcare information on YouTube: A systematic review. Health informatics journal 21:173-194. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458213512220

Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R (1999) DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. Journal of epidemiology and community health 53:105-111. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.53.2.105

Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP (2012) YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis--a wakeup call?. The Journal of rheumatology 39: 899-903. https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.111114

Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA (1997) Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor--Let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA 277: 244–1245.

Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, Rose C, Leddin D, Van Zanten SV (2007) A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. The American journal of gastroenterology 102:2070–2077. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01325.x

Erdem MN, Karaca S (2018) Evaluating the Accuracy and Quality of the Information in Kyphosis Videos Shared on YouTube. Spine 43:1334-1339. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002691

Anadolulu Aİ, Gerçel G, Durakbaşa ÇU (2023) Quality Assessment of YouTube Videos as an Information Source for Bowel Management in Children. Journal of pediatric surgery 58:2343-2346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2023.08.014

Ranade AS, Belthur MV, Oka GA, Malone JD (2020) YouTube as an information source for clubfoot: a quality analysis of video content. Journal of pediatric orthopedics. Part B 29:375-378. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPB.0000000000000694

Semerci R, Şimşek E, Savaş E, Orhan E, Erbey F (2024) The quality and content analysis of YouTube videos about chemotherapy for children. Pediatric blood & cancer 71:30865. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.30865

Toprak T, Tokat E. A quality analysis of nocturnal enuresis videos on YouTube. J Pediatr Urol. 2021 Aug;17:449.e1-449.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2021.03.014.

Nishizaki N, Hirano D, Oishi K, Shimizu T (2022) YouTube videos in Japanese as a source of information on nocturnal enuresis: A content-quality and reliability analysis. Pediatrics international : official journal of the Japan Pediatric Society 64:15049. https://doi.org/10.1111/ped.15049

Duymaz YK, Şahin Ş, Erkmen B, Uzar T, Önder S (2023) Evaluating YouTube as a source of patient information for pediatric tracheostomy care. International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology 171:111580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2023.111580

Bai G, Pan X, Zhao T, Chen X, Liu G, Fu W (2022) Quality Assessment of YouTube Videos as an Information Source for Testicular Torsion. Frontiers in public health 10:905609. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.905609

Hakami Z, Maganur PC, Khanagar SB, Naik S, Alhakami K, Bawazeer OA, Alassiry AM, Vishwanathaiah S (2022) Thumb-Sucking Habits and Oral Health: An Analysis of YouTube Content. Children (Basel, Switzerland) 9:225. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9020225

Bağcı N, Taka K, Peker İ (2021) Ağız Kanseri Konusundaki YouTube Videolarının değerlendirilmesi. Yeditepe J Dent 17:102-107 https://doi.org/10.5505/yeditepe.2021.38278

Zaliznyak M, Masterson JM, Duel B (2022) YouTube as a source for information on newborn male circumcision: Is YouTube a reliable patient resource?. Journal of pediatric urology 18:678.e1-678.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2022.07.011

Ekenci BY, Sarı H (2023) How quality and reliable are youtube videos about hydrocele for patients? Androl Bul 25:27-31 https://doi.org/10.24898/tandro.2023.75010

Barry R, Murray G, Kravvas G, Bunker CB, Watchorn RE (2023) Circumcision and social media. A cross-sectional analysis of circumcision videos on Youtube. International journal of STD & AIDS 34: 505–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/09564624231163628

Nason GJ, Tareen F, Quinn F (2013) Hydrocele on the web: an evaluation of Internet-based information. Scandinavian journal of urology 47:152–157. https://doi.org/10.3109/00365599.2012.719540

Downloads

Published

2024-08-07

How to Cite

Çoşkun, N., & Demir, E. (2024). Analysis of YouTube Videos on Circumcision: Evaluating Reliability and Quality for Patients and Parents. European Journal of Therapeutics, 30(5), 626–637. https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther2250

Issue

Section

Original Articles

Categories