Search

Your search keyword '"Fraia, Agostino"' showing total 3 results
Start Over Author "Fraia, Agostino" Journal vaccines
3 results on '"Fraia, Agostino"'

1. Immunotherapy for Urological Tumors on YouTubeTM: An Information-Quality Analysis

Author

Di Bello, Francesco, primary, Di Mauro, Ernesto, additional, Collà Ruvolo, Claudia, additional, Creta, Massimiliano, additional, La Rocca, Roberto, additional, Celentano, Giuseppe, additional, Capece, Marco, additional, Napolitano, Luigi, additional, Fraia, Agostino, additional, Pezone, Gabriele, additional, Morra, Simone, additional, Imbimbo, Ciro, additional, Mirone, Vincenzo, additional, Longo, Nicola, additional, and Califano, Gianluigi, additional

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. Immunotherapy for Urological Tumors on YouTube TM : An Information-Quality Analysis.

Author

Di Bello, Francesco, Di Mauro, Ernesto, Collà Ruvolo, Claudia, Creta, Massimiliano, La Rocca, Roberto, Celentano, Giuseppe, Capece, Marco, Napolitano, Luigi, Fraia, Agostino, Pezone, Gabriele, Morra, Simone, Imbimbo, Ciro, Mirone, Vincenzo, Longo, Nicola, and Califano, Gianluigi

Subjects
PROSTATE cancer, RENAL cell carcinoma, RENAL cancer, CROWDSOURCING, TRANSITIONAL cell carcinoma, IMMUNOTHERAPY
Abstract

Background: YouTubeTM is an open-access source for mass information. Several previous studies of YouTubeTM videos showed a high rate of misinformation in the urological field. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the quality of information on immunotherapy (IMT) for urological tumors uploaded to YouTubeTM. Methods: YouTubeTM videos were searched using nine keyword combinations. The PEMAT, the DISCERN tool, and the Misinformation scale were used to assess the quality of information in YouTubeTM videos about IMT for urological tumors. Descriptive statistics and Kruskal–Wallis, Chi-square, proportion, and Pearson's tests were performed. Results: According to the selection criteria, 156 YouTubeTM videos were suitable for the analysis and stratified according to topic (urothelial carcinoma vs. renal cell cancer vs. prostate cancer vs. general information on IMT). According to PEMAT A/V, the overall Understandability score was 40% (Inter-Quartile Range [IQR]: 20–61.5) and the overall Actionability score was 0% (IQR: 0–25). According to the DISCERN tool, the overall DISCERN score was 44 (IQR: 39–53.2), defined as "fair". According to the Misinformation scale, we recorded the lowest median overall score for item 4 ("IMT in multimodality approach") and item 5 ("Future perspective"). Conclusions: YouTubeTM cannot be recommended as a reliable source of information on IMT for urological malignancies. In addition, YouTubeTM videos contributed to the spread of misinformation by underestimating the role of IMT in a multimodality approach and missing the findings of published clinical trial results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

3. Immunotherapy for Urological Tumors on YouTubeTM: An Information-Quality Analysis

Author

Francesco Di Bello, Ernesto Di Mauro, Claudia Collà Ruvolo, Massimiliano Creta, Roberto La Rocca, Giuseppe Celentano, Marco Capece, Luigi Napolitano, Agostino Fraia, Gabriele Pezone, Simone Morra, Ciro Imbimbo, Vincenzo Mirone, Nicola Longo, Gianluigi Califano, Di Bello, Francesco, Di Mauro, Ernesto, Collà Ruvolo, Claudia, Creta, Massimiliano, La Rocca, Roberto, Celentano, Giuseppe, Capece, Marco, Napolitano, Luigi, Fraia, Agostino, Pezone, Gabriele, Morra, Simone, Imbimbo, Ciro, Mirone, Vincenzo, Longo, Nicola, and Califano, Gianluigi

Subjects
Pharmacology, Infectious Diseases, YouTube, social media, Drug Discovery, Immunology, Pharmacology (medical), patient nformation, urology, urothelial carcinoma
Abstract

Background: YouTubeTM is an open-access source for mass information. Several previous studies of YouTubeTM videos showed a high rate of misinformation in the urological field. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the quality of information on immunotherapy (IMT) for urological tumors uploaded to YouTubeTM. Methods: YouTubeTM videos were searched using nine keyword combinations. The PEMAT, the DISCERN tool, and the Misinformation scale were used to assess the quality of information in YouTubeTM videos about IMT for urological tumors. Descriptive statistics and Kruskal–Wallis, Chi-square, proportion, and Pearson’s tests were performed. Results: According to the selection criteria, 156 YouTubeTM videos were suitable for the analysis and stratified according to topic (urothelial carcinoma vs. renal cell cancer vs. prostate cancer vs. general information on IMT). According to PEMAT A/V, the overall Understandability score was 40% (Inter-Quartile Range [IQR]: 20–61.5) and the overall Actionability score was 0% (IQR: 0–25). According to the DISCERN tool, the overall DISCERN score was 44 (IQR: 39–53.2), defined as “fair”. According to the Misinformation scale, we recorded the lowest median overall score for item 4 (“IMT in multimodality approach”) and item 5 (“Future perspective”). Conclusions: YouTubeTM cannot be recommended as a reliable source of information on IMT for urological malignancies. In addition, YouTubeTM videos contributed to the spread of misinformation by underestimating the role of IMT in a multimodality approach and missing the findings of published clinical trial results.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results