ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

Nowadays, the living conditions are better and people have definitely better healthcare. That is the reason for population aging. The World Health Organization (WHO) provides that: ‘By 2030, 1 in 6 people in the world will be aged 60 years or over.’
Nowadays, the living conditions are better and people have de-
nitely better healthcare. That is the reason for population aging. The
World Health Organization (WHO) provides that: ‘By 2030, 1 in 6
people in the world will be aged 60 years or over.’ The bigger the
population of 60 years and over people is, the higher healthcare stan-
dard has to be. The aging population has specic characteristics. The
variety of older people is really high, some of them are in good con-
dition but some of them are dependent and frail. Frailty syndrome
aects about 18% of the European population aged 65 and over [1].
Weakness, slowness, fallings, fatigue, and many more describe frail-
ty. It is challenging for the patient, their family and caregivers. The
knowledge about frailty should be increased. To meet up this prob-
lem, the YouTube platform could be used. This platform could be
useful for searching health information but with caution because the
quality is diverse. It is important to evaluate the quality and reliability
of medical videos. There are some papers that present the evaluation
of videos about diseases or operations. Consequently, the authors of
the article “Concerns of Quality and Reliability of Educational Vid-
eos Focused on Frailty Syndrome on YouTube Platform” prepared the
evaluation of videos focused on frailty syndrome [2].
The videos could be evaluated by approved tools such as quali-
ty criteria for consumer health information (DISCERN), the Glob-
al Quality Score (GQS), and the Journal of American Medical As-
sociation (JAMA). DISCERN is a scoring system consisting of 16
questions, each with 5 points. It is used to rate the reliability. While
GQS is used to rate the quality and is a one-choice assessment scored
between 1 and 5. JAMA consists of 4 questions, each with a score of
1, used to rate the quality and reliability. Authors also analysed basic
parameters of videos such as video provider, content and duration of
the video, view count, average daily views, channel subscribers, the
*Corresponding author: Natalia Maria Hawryluk, Department of Family Medi-
cine and Infectious Diseases, University of Warmia and Mazury, 10-719 Olsztyn,
Poland, Tel: +48 725487433; E-mail: bnhawryluk@gmial.com
Citation: Hawryluk NM, Stompór M (2022) Will Youtube Platform be the Main
Source of Patients’ Knowledge about Frailty? J Gerontol Geriatr Med 8: 119.
Received: January 10, 2022; Accepted: January 20, 2022; Published: January
27, 2022
Copyright: © 2022 Hawryluk NM, et al. This is an open-access article distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits un-
restricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original
author and source are credited.
number of days since the upload date, likes, dislikes, comments, the
external webpages linked to the videos.
Undertaking researches related to the evaluation of the quality of
YouTube videos from various elds may help in increasing the pa-
tients’ awareness and knowledge. Some articles presented the results
which clearly showed that the quality of videos is poor [3-5]. How-
ever, there are papers with opposite results, which is quite promising
[6,7]. Poor quality videos could make conicts between patient and
doctor, lose trust and confuse the patients. The Internet contains a
large amount of medical information, but inappropriate websites can
mislead patients [8]. The standardized tools could be used to evaluate
the quality of videos, and the misinformation could be solved. The
information provided in the videos should contain high quality data.
Combining the content of the videos and information given by phy-
sicians could improve the outcome of healthcare. Physicians could
emphasize that patients need to be aware when searching medical in-
formation from the YouTube platform.
Patients and their caregivers could increase knowledge and raise
awareness about frailty syndrome using YouTube, it would be essen-
tial for the management and help in the prevention of it. The videos
focused on frailty syndrome contain information about prevention,
risk factors, symptoms, diet programs, and appropriate exercises. The
quality of videos mostly depends on the authorship [2]. To sum up,
the YouTube platform could be an essential source of information for
patients, because the number of videos and users is still increasing. It
could be the future of healthcare, using online tools the cooperation
between physicians and patients would be better.
References
1. O’Caoimh R, Galluzzo L, Rodríguez-Laso Á, Van der Heyden J, Ranho
AH, et al. (2018) Prevalence of frailty at population level in European
ADVANTAGE Joint Action Member States: a systematic review and me-
ta-analysis. Ann Ist Super Sanita 54: 226-238.
2. Hawryluk NM, Stompór M, Joniec EZ (2022) Concerns of Quality and Re-
liability of Educational Videos Focused on Frailty Syndrome on YouTube
Platform. Geriatrics 7: 3.
3. Kuru T, Erken HY (2020) Evaluation of the quality and reliability of you-
tube videos on rotator cu tears. Cureus 12: 6852.
4. Cassidy JT, Fitzgerald E, Cassidy ES, Cleary M, Byrne DP, et al. (2018)
YouTube provides poor information regarding anterior cruciate ligament
injury and reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26: 840-
845.
5. Yaradılmış YU, Evren AT, Okkaoğlu MC, Öztürk Ö, Haberal B, et al.
(2020) Evaluation of quality and reliability of YouTube videos on spondy-
lolisthesis. Interdisciplinary Neurosurgery 22: 100827.
6. Szmuda T, Alkhater A, Albrahim M, Alquraya E, Ali S, et al. (2020) You-
Tube as a source of patient information for stroke: A content-quality and
an audience engagement analysis. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 29: 105065.
7. Ng CH, Lim GRS, Fong W (2020) Quality of English-language videos
on YouTube as a source of information on systemic lupus erythematosus.
International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases 23: 1636-1644.
8. Swire-Thompson B, Lazer D (2020) Public Health and Online Misinfor-
mation: Challenges and Recommendations. Annu Rev Public Health 41:
433-451.
Hawryluk NM, et al., J Gerontol Geriatr Med 2022, 8: 119
DOI: 10.24966/GGM-8662/100119
HSOA Journal of
Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine
Commentary
Natalia Maria Hawryluk* and Małgorzata Stompór
Department of Family Medicine and Infectious Diseases, University of
Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn, Poland
Will YouTube Platform be
the Main Source of Patients’
Knowledge about Frailty?
Herald Scholarly Open Access, 2561 Cornelia Rd, #205, Herndon, VA 20171, USA.
Tel: +1 202-499-9679; E-mail: info@heraldsopenaccess.us
http://www.heraldopenaccess.us/
Submit Your Manuscript: https://www.heraldopenaccess.us/submit-manuscript
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
(1) Background: Evaluation of the quality and reliability of the frailty syndrome videos available on YouTube platform was the aim of this study. (2) Methods: The observational study included 75 videos retrieved by searching seven terms related to frailty syndrome on YouTube. The quality and reliability of the videos were measured using three different tools: quality criteria for consumer health information (DISCERN), the Global Quality Score (GQS), and the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA). The video content was categorized according to the following characteristics: video provider, duration, view count, average daily views of the video, average daily views of a channel, channel subscribers, number of days since upload date, likes, dislikes, comments, the external webpages linked to the videos. (3) Results: The videos had a mean duration of 375 s and an average number of views of 1114. The quality of 17 videos assessed in the study was found to be high, 48—intermediate, and 10—low. The high-quality videos had the longest duration, the highest number of views, and points for the DISCERN score. The physician uploaders had the highest mean DISCERN and mean GQS scores, the highest number of views, and the longest duration but the hospital channels had the highest JAMA score. (4) Conclusions: YouTube can be a valuable source of medical information for patients and caregivers. The quality of videos mostly depends on the authorship and the source of video providers—physicians, academic, and health care-related organizations provide the best quality content based on professional medical knowledge.
Article
Full-text available
Background YouTube is the most popular and the largest video portal and is a source of information in all areas. In our study, we aim to investigate the quality of videos on spondylolisthesis in the YouTube video portal and to detail the parameters for low-quality videos. Material and Methods A search was made by using keyword “spondylolisthesis” on the YouTube search portal. 50 most watched videos were included in the study. The duration of the videos, view counts, like counts, dislike counts, number of comments, the date the video was published, and the video's release time were noted. Popularity of the video is determined by Video Power Index (VPI) and video quality is evaluated with DISCERN (Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information), JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association), and Global Quality Score (GQS) scoring systems. Video content was categorized as physician and non-physician, video length, release date, view count, daily view count, VPI, comments/year. The relationship between the groups and video quality was evaluated. Results Video uploaders consist of 27 physicians (54%), 7 health channels, 6 physiotherapists, 4 patients, 4 hospital channels, 1 chiropractic, 1 fitness coach. The mean JAMA score was 2.7±0.6 (1-4), the mean DISCERN score was 35±11.1 (16-64) and the mean GQS score was 2.84±1.05. DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS scores correlate among themselves. In linear regression analysis, there was a significant difference between the duration of the videos, the view counts and the video quality scores (DISCERN and JAMA) (p<0.05), no significant difference was observed between the daily view counts, like counts, dislike counts, VPI and comment count (p> 0.05). Conclusion The video quality of videos on Spondylolisthesis on YouTube was found to be low. Especially videos by non-physician uploaders, short videos, most viewed videos were found to have low quality.
Article
Full-text available
Background Stroke is the second leading cause of death worldwide following ischemic heart disease, and the fifth in the United States. The video-sharing database, YouTube, is the second most popular visited website with more than 2 billion users, thus it's increasingly being used as a medium for delivering health information. Aim We aimed to evaluate the quality, reliability and audience engagement of stroke-related YouTube videos. Methods In October 2019 we conducted a search on YouTube using 5 keywords: stroke, brain attack, hemorrhagic stroke, ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack. We selected the first 30 videos from each search query for further analysis. The validated DISCERN instrument was used (a score of 0-5 per question) to assess the videos by four independent raters. We then recorded qualitative data and quantitative data for each video. Results After sorting through 150 stroke videos, a total of 101 unique YouTube videos met our inclusion criteria. We found that the mean overall quality of YouTube videos according to DISCERN is of fair quality. Most videos (65.3%) were uploaded by hospitals, mentioned the symptoms of stroke (66.3%), had a doctor speaking (60.4%) and contained diagrams (20.8%). Conclusion YouTube is a useful source of gathering information about treatment choices for patients and their families as the quality of YouTube videos is fair. The audience engagement suggestions in our paper may help content creators improve the appeal of YouTube videos.
Article
Full-text available
The internet has become a popular resource to learn about health and to investigate one's own health condition. However, given the large amount of inaccurate information online, people can easily become misinformed. Individuals have always obtained information from outside the formal health care system, so how has the internet changed people's engagement with health information? This review explores how individuals interact with health misinformation online, whether it be through search, user-generated content, or mobile apps. We discuss whether personal access to information is helping or hindering health outcomes and how the perceived trustworthiness of the institutions communicating health has changed over time. To conclude, we propose several constructive strategies for improving the online information ecosystem. Misinformation concerning health has particularly severe consequences with regard to people's quality of life and even their risk of mortality; therefore, understanding it within today's modern context is an extremely important task. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Public Health, Volume 41 is April 1, 2020. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
Article
Full-text available
Introduction: Although frailty is common among community-dwelling older adults, its prevalence in Europe and how this varies between countries is unclear. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of literature on frailty prevalence in 22 European countries involved in the Joint Action ADVANTAGE was conducted. Results: Sixty-two papers, representing 68 unique datasets were included. Meta-analysis showed an overall estimated frailty prevalence of 18% (95% confidence interval, CI, 15-21%). The prevalence in community (n = 53) vs non-community based studies (n = 15) was 12% (95% CI 10-15%) and 45% (95% CI 27-63%), respectively. Pooled prevalence in community studies adopting a physical phenotype was 12% (95% CI 10-14%, n = 45) vs 16% (95% CI 7-29%, n = 8) for all other definitions. Sub-analysis of a subgroup of studies assessed as high-quality (n = 47) gave a pooled estimate of 17% (95% CI 13-21%). Conclusions: The considerable and significant heterogeneity found warrants the development of common methodological approaches to provide accurate and comparable frailty prevalence estimates at population-level.
Article
Background Many patients turn to online platforms to obtain healthcare information, but the quality and accuracy of the information is largely unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reliability and quality of the most viewed English‐language YouTube videos on systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods YouTube was searched using keywords “systemic lupus erythematosus” and videos were categorized as useful information, misleading information, useful patient opinion, and misleading patient opinion. Reliability was scored using a modified 5‐point DISCERN tool (where higher scores represent greater reliability), while quality was rated using the 5‐point Global Quality Scale (GQS). Content covered included epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical features, diagnosis and treatment of SLE. Results Of the top 183 relevant videos, 124 (67.8%) were classified as useful information, 21 (11.5%) as misleading information, 29 (15.8%) as useful patient opinion, 9 (4.9%) as misleading patient opinion. Useful information videos were primarily produced by professionals (62.1%), with videos being of greater reliability and quality than other groups. However, video characteristics collected were largely comparable across all groups. The majority (68.9%) of the videos addressed patients. Conclusion Our findings highlight an abundance of YouTube videos with useful information on SLE, that are mostly reliable and of high quality. However, in order to effectively educate patients, pitfalls such as misleading content, falsely elevated video characteristics and non‐professional sources need to be made known to patients. As part of holistic care, healthcare professionals should advise patients to seek information from reputed sources.
Article
PurposeYouTube is a global medium used predominantly by young adults (aged 18–49 years). This study examined the quality of YouTube information regarding ACL injury and reconstruction. Methods YouTube was searched on the 13th of June 2015 for “ACL” and “anterior cruciate ligament” with/without associated terms of “injury”, “reconstruction”, and “surgery”. Videos were evaluated by two independent reviewers [EF (Reviewer 1), (Reviewer 2)] using two recognized information scoring systems (Modified DISCERN (MD) 0–5 and JAMA Benchmark 0–4) and an adaptation of a score designed for written ACL information [ACL Specific Score (ASS) 0–25]. The ASS categorized scores as very good (21–25), good (16–20), moderate (11–15), poor (6–10), and very poor (0–5). Number of views/likes/dislikes, animation, and continent of origin and source (e.g., corporate/educational) were recorded. Correlation of video characteristics with number of views was examined using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) model. Agreement between reviewers was assessed by Interclass Correlation Co-efficient (ICC). ResultsFollowing a filtering process of the 964,770 identified videos, 39 videos were retained. The mean MD score was 2.3 (standard deviation (SD) ±0.9) for Reviewer 1 and 2.2 (SD ±0.9) for Reviewer 2 (ICC = 0.7). The mean JAMA score was 2.5(SD ±0.7) for Reviewer 1 and 2.3 (SD ±0.7) for Reviewer 2 (ICC = 0.8). The mean ASS was 6.3 (SD ±3.5) for Reviewer 1 and 4.6 (SD ±2.9) for Reviewer 2 (ICC = 0.9). Five videos achieved moderate score (13%), while 15 (38%) and 19 (49%) scored as poor and very poor, respectively. There was no correlation between number of views and video quality/video source for any scoring system. Conclusion The majority of videos viewed on YouTube regarding ACL injury and treatment are of low quality.