Literature DB >> 34172941

Is social media reliable as a source of information on Peyronie's disease treatment?

Numan Baydilli1, Ismail Selvi2.   

Abstract

Although YouTube video is one of the most widely used and easily accessible information sharing sources, its widespread use can carry the risk of spreading misleading and unreliable information. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy, reliability, quality, and content of the most viewed YouTube videos related to Peyronie's disease treatment. The keywords of "penile curvature", "penile deformity", "bent penis" "curved penis", and "Peyronie's disease" were searched on YouTube. Among 700 YouTube videos, 267 videos were included in the study. They were categorized by two independent urologists with board certification as accurate information (n = 138, 51.7%) or inaccurate information (n = 129, 48.3%). Accurate videos contained information about the treatment of Peyronie's disease with proven scientific accuracy according to the current guidelines, whereas inaccurate videos contained scientifically unproven or incorrect information and recommendations not in the guidelines. A 5-point modified DISCERN scale and Global Quality Score were used for reliability and quality assessment. Although the accurate information group had a significantly higher DISCERN Score (3, IQR = 3-4 vs. 1, IQR = 1-2, p < .001) and Global Quality Score (5, IQR = 4-5 vs. 2, IQR = 1-3 p < 0.001); the number of views per day (10.37, IQR = 3.01-28.12 vs. 6.65, IQR = 1.55-27.87) and likes (36, IQR = 6-145 vs. 19.5, IQR = 4-121.7) were higher but not significant in the inaccurate information group. The majority of the videos in the inaccurate information group were uploaded by medical advertisement/for profit companies (51.2%) and individual users/patients (38.8%), whereas universities/professional organizations/nonprofit physician/physician groups constituted the majority in the accurate information group (60.9%). According to our findings, videos containing inaccurate information are more popular. People should be made aware that they should not immediately believe the videos containing medical advertisements without consulting nonprofit physicians.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34172941     DOI: 10.1038/s41443-021-00454-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Impot Res        ISSN: 0955-9930            Impact factor:   2.896


  18 in total

1.  Dissemination of Misinformative and Biased Information about Prostate Cancer on YouTube.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Shomik Sengupta; Mohit Butaney; Joseph N Macaluso; Stefan W Czarniecki; Rebecca Robbins; R Scott Braithwaite; Lingshan Gao; Nataliya Byrne; Dawn Walter; Aisha Langford
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  Prostate Cancer Social Media: In YouTube We Trust?

Authors:  Benedito Carneiro; Don S Dizon
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2019-01-11       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 3.  Penile curvature: an update for management from 20 years experience in a high volume centre.

Authors:  Francesco Sasso; Matteo Vittori; Alessandro D'Addessi; Pier Francesco Bassi
Journal:  Urologia       Date:  2016-04-12

4.  Evaluating the Accuracy and Quality of the Information in Kyphosis Videos Shared on YouTube.

Authors:  Mehmet Nuri Erdem; Sinan Karaca
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2018-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 5.  Therapeutic advances in the treatment of Peyronie's disease.

Authors:  F A Yafi; M R Pinsky; P Sangkum; W J G Hellstrom
Journal:  Andrology       Date:  2015-06-20       Impact factor: 3.842

6.  YouTube English videos as a source of information on breast self-examination.

Authors:  Ebru Esen; Mehmet Aslan; Bilgehan Çağdaş Sonbahar; Ramazan Saygın Kerimoğlu
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2018-11-15       Impact factor: 4.872

7.  English-language videos on YouTube as a source of information on self-administer subcutaneous anti-tumour necrosis factor agent injections.

Authors:  Sena Tolu; Ozan Volkan Yurdakul; Betul Basaran; Aylin Rezvani
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 2.631

8.  YouTube as a Source of Information About Premature Ejaculation Treatment.

Authors:  Murat Gul; Mehmet Akif Diri
Journal:  J Sex Med       Date:  2019-09-12       Impact factor: 3.802

9.  Can YouTube English Videos Be Recommended as an Accurate Source for Learning About Testicular Self-examination?

Authors:  Ismail Selvi; Numan Baydilli; Emre Can Akinsal
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2020-08-10       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  YouTube as a Source of Information on Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Janak Adhikari; Priyadarshani Sharma; Lubina Arjyal; Dipesh Uprety
Journal:  N Am J Med Sci       Date:  2016-04
View more
  3 in total

1.  Analysis of quality information provided by "Dr. YouTubeTM" on Phimosis.

Authors:  Simone Cilio; Claudia Collà Ruvolo; Carmine Turco; Massimiliano Creta; Marco Capece; Roberto La Rocca; Giuseppe Celentano; Gianluigi Califano; Simone Morra; Alberto Melchionna; Francesco Mangiapia; Felice Crocetto; Paolo Verze; Alessandro Palmieri; Ciro Imbimbo; Vincenzo Mirone
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 2.896

2.  Assessing information on YouTube™ as a quality source for the treatment of varicoceles.

Authors:  H Stephen Hong; J Jacob Lang; Shivashankar Damodaran; Puneet Sindhwani
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2021-10-01

3.  YouTube is inadequate as an information source on delayed ejaculation.

Authors:  Tuncay Toprak; Mehmet Yilmaz; Mehmet Akif Ramazanoglu; Ayhan Verit; Daniel Schlager; Arkadiusz Miernik
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 2.896

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.