Search

Several previous studies on YouTube TM information on medical topics have already been published. The current study aimed to evaluate the quality information of YouTube TM videos on Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors (PDE5-is). A systematic search on YouTube™ was conducted using 30 keyword combinations. For each keyword's combination, the first 50 videos were recorded. The quality of videos on YouTube™ was assessed with Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for audio-visual content (PEMAT A/V), DISCERN score and a specified created Misinformation tool. According to the selection criteria, 229 YouTube™ videos were suitable for the analyses. Videos were stratified according to the five main identified topics: sildenafil [n = 98; 42.79%] vs tadalafil [n = 50; 21.83%] vs vardenafil [n = 44;19.21%] vs avanafil [n = 17; 7.42%] vs PDE5-is in general [n = 20; 8.73%]. The median overall PEMAT A/V Understandability score and Actionability score were 55% (interquartile range [IQR]: 42-75) and 0% (IQR = 0-67), respectively. Specifically, according to our stratification, YouTube Videos on avanafil reached higher values of both Understandability and Actionability (72.7% and 66.7, respectively) in contrast to other categories. According to DISCERN tool, the total overall median score was 29.5 (IQR = 18-41). According to Misinformation scale, the item 1 ('sexual stimulation') harboured an overall median score of 2 (IQR = 1-2); the item 2 ('side effects') an overall median score of 2 (IQR = 1-3); the item 3 ('treatment choices') an overall median score of 1 (IQR = 1-2); the item 4 ('contraindications') an overall median score of 2 (IQR = 1-2). YouTube™ is a fast and open-access source for mass information. The overall quality of the PDE5-is contents provided is sadly unsatisfactory. Nowadays, YouTube™ cannot be recommended as a reliable source of information on PDE5-is., Competing Interests: Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

The objective of the current study was to evaluate the quality of the information provided in YouTube TM videos on phimosis. The term "phimosis" was searched on YouTube TM , and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for Audio/Visual Materials (Understandability and Actionability sections, good-quality score of minimum 70%) and misinformation scale (rated from 1 to 5) were used to assess video quality. Quality assessment was investigated over time. Of all, 60 were eligible for analysis. Healthcare providers were the authors of 75.0% of the videos, and 73.3% of the videos were patient-targeted. The median Understandability score was 42.9% (interquartile range [IQR]:34.5-58.9) and ranged from 28.6 to 42.9% (2013-2020). The median Actionability score was 50.0% (IQR:25.0-56.2) and ranged from 25.0 to 50.0% (2013-2020). The median misinformation score was 2.8/5 (IQR:1.6-3.6), and although the score fluctuated over time, the median score was 2.6 both in 2013 and in 2020. According to our results, although an increase of PEMAT over time was observed, the overall quality of the information uploaded on YouTube TM is low. Therefore, at present, YouTube TM cannot be recommended as a reliable source of information on phimosis. Video producers should upload higher-quality videos to help physicians and patients in the decision-making process., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Several previous studies on YouTube™ on urological field have already been published. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the quality information of YouTube TM videos on testicular pain. Using Google Trends tool, the frequency of worldwide YouTube TM and Google Search on testicular pain was examined from 2010 to 2020. The keywords "testicular pain", "testicular ache" and "scrotal pain" were used on the YouTube platform and the first 100 YouTube TM videos were analyzed for each one. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for Audiovisual (A/V) Materials, the DISCERN score and Misinformation tool were used to assess video quality. According to YouTube™ Search the mean relative frequency search for "testicular pain" ranged from 10.5 to 30.0%. According to Google TM Search it ranged from 73.7 to 91.0%, Of all 300 videos, 117 were eligible for the analysis. The median number of views, thumbs-up and thumbs-down was respectively: 47060 (interquartile range [IQR] = 6297.0-144188.0), 289 (IQR = 40-912) and 19 (IQR = 4-53). Of all videos, 68.4% and 31.6% were produced respectively by Medical Doctors and Other. The median PEMAT Actionability and Understandability scores were 66.7% and 66.7%, respectively. The median DISCERN score ranged from 1 to 5, with an overall median score of 3, defined from question 16. The median misinformation score ranged from 2 to 5. In conclusion, an increased interest on testicular pain was recorded on both YouTube TM and Google search during the last decade. However, according to the quality assessment tools used, YouTube™ users cannot get trustful and exhaustive information on testicular pain. Therefore, authors with/without medical background should improve the quality of information on YouTube™ videos., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Objective: To evaluate the quality information on testicular cancer uploaded on YouTube™ videos., Methods: YouTube™ videos were searched using "Testicular cancer" as a keyword. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool, the Misinformation scale, and the DISCERN tool were used to assess the quality information of YouTube™ videos on testicular cancer., Results: According to the selection criteria, 121 YouTube™ videos were collected for the analysis and stratified according to uploading year (2009-2014 vs 2015-2020). According to the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for audio-visual content, the overall Understandability score was 60% (interquartile range 45.5-75) and the overall Actionability score was 100% (interquartile range 66.7-100). According to the Misinformation scale, the lowest median was recorded for item 6 ("Effects on fertility") and the overall median Misinformation score was 2 (interquartile range 1.3-2.8). No statistically significant differences were observed according to uploading year (all P > 0.05). Of all, only 54 (44.6%) videos mentioning treatment were subsequently analyzed. Of these videos, the overall Understandability was 71.4% (interquartile range 56.3-84.6) and the overall Actionability was 100% (interquartile range 66.7-100). The overall Misinformation score was 2.8 (interquartile range 2.2-3.5). The median DISCERN score recorded for question 16 was 5 (interquartile range 3-5)., Conclusions: YouTube™ is a fast and open-access source for mass information. The overall quality of the testicular cancer contents provided is sadly unsatisfactory, in the present likewise in the past. However, YouTube™ videos mentioning treatment options showed higher quality content, than the remaining one. Nevertheless, all the videos analyzed underestimated the testicular cancer effects on fertility. Nowadays, YouTube™ cannot be recommended as a reliable source of information on testicular cancer., (© 2022 The Japanese Urological Association.)

Objective: The Internet is an important and easily accessible source of information. The aim of the current study was to investigate the quality of YouTube videos on cystoscopy and to establish if they can be used as a reliable information tool for internet users., Materials and Methods: The search term "cystoscopy" was used on YouTube platform and the first 120 YouTube videos were analyzed. To assess the video quality Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for Audiovisual (A/V) Materials (Understandability and Actionability sections), Misinformation score and Global Quality Score (GQS) were used., Results: Of all 120 videos, 72 were included in the analyses. Of all videos, 59.7% (n = 43), and 40.3% (n = 29) were targeted to General Public and Healthcare Workers. Moreover, "technical aspects" was the main topic addressed (n = 29, 40.3%). The median PEMAT A/V Understandability and Actionability scores were 50.0% (IQR: 39.1-70.0) and 66.7% (IQR: 33.3- 100.0), respectively. The median Misinformation score ranged from 1.0 to 3.0. According to GQS, 22 (30.6%), 26 (36.1%), 16 (22.2%), 8 (11.1%) videos were poor, generally poor, moderate, and good, respectively. No video was evaluated as excellent., Conclusions: Today, YouTube videos on cystoscopy are more frequently uploaded by healthcare workers, who share information about specific aspects of this procedure. However, the quality of YouTube contents on cystoscopy is still poor. Therefore, currently users interested in cystoscopy cannot rely on YouTube to get good informative material on this topic. In consequence, future authors should focus on improving the quality of video contents on cystoscopy.

Aim: To evaluate the quality of YouTube™ videos on bladder pain syndrome (BPS) and to investigate whether they can be used as a reliable source of information., Methods: The search term "bladder pain syndrome" was used on YouTube TM platform. The first 100 videos were selected. Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for audio-visual content (PEMAT A/V), Global Quality Score (GQS), Misinformation tool, and DISCERN score were used to assess videos' quality content. Pearson's test was used to assess potential correlations between variables., Results: Seventy-nine videos were suitable for the analyses. The median PEMAT A/V Understandability score and PEMAT A/V Actionability score were 66.7% (interquartile range [IQR]: 46.2-100.0) and 75.0% (IQR: 37.5-100.0), respectively. According to GQS, 26 (32.9%), 32 (40.5%), 3 (3.8%), 15 (19.0%), and 3 (3.8%) videos were excellent, good, moderate, generally poor, and poor, respectively. According to Misinformation tool, of all videos, 81% (n = 64), 6.3% (n = 5), 5.1% (n = 4), 5.1% (n = 4), 2.5% (n = 2) had respectively no, very little, moderate, high, and extreme misinformation. The overall median DISCERN score ranged from 5.0 (IQR: 2.0-5.0) to 5.0 (IQR: 5.0-5.0). A positive statistically significant correlation was found between video length and PEMAT A/V Understandability (r = 0.27, p = 0.01), video length and PEMAT A/V Actionability (r = .26, p = 0.02), and video length and DISCERN Question 16 (r = 0.28, p = 0.01)., Conclusions: Nowaday, the overall quality of YouTube TM videos on BPS have been evaluated good according to PEMAT A/V, GQS, Misinformation tool, and DISCERN score. It is possible to assume that YouTube TM may be considered as a reliable source of information on BPS., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)