Quality of Information in YouTube Videos on Erectile Dysfunction. Issue 3 (24th June 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Fode, Mikkel; Nolsøe, Alexander B.; Jacobsen, Frederik M.; Russo, Giorgio Ivan; Østergren, Peter B.; Jensen, Christian Fuglesang S.; Albersen, Maarten; Capogrosso, Paolo; Sønksen, Jens
• Is Part Of: Sexual medicine. Volume 8:Issue 3(2020)
• Page Start: 408
• Page End: 413
• Publication Date: 2020-06-24
• Subjects: Communication -- Erectile dysfunction -- Information -- Internet -- Misinformation -- Online -- Social media -- YouTube; Sexual disorders -- Periodicals; Sexual health -- Periodicals; 616.69005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.esxm.2020.05.007
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2050-1161

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Many patients seek information online including on social media. Aim: To assess the quality of information regarding erectile dysfunction (ED) in YouTube videos. Methods: We searched "erectile dysfunction" on YouTube in October 2019 and evaluated the first 100 videos in English sorted by relevance. Main Outcome Measure: We recorded the user engagement, video producer, intended audience, and content. Videos containing medical information were evaluated using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) and the DISCERN quality criteria for consumer health information. The PEMAT evaluates the understandability and actionability of materials as a percentage. The DISCERN assesses the quality of information by a scale from 1 (serious or extensive shortcomings) to 5 (minimal shortcomings). Results: The median number of total views was 22, 450 (range 591–20, 255, 133) and the median number of views/month was 654 (range 9–723, 398). 42 percent of the videos were posted by professional medical institutions, and 21% were posted by individual medical professionals. Most videos were aimed at the general public or patients suffering from ED. The median PEMAT understandability and actionability scores were both 100% (range 50–100% and 33–100%, respectively). The median DISCERN score was 2 (range 1-5) with 80.4% receiving a score of ≤3. Overall, 28% of the videos contained direct misinformation. DISCERN scores were higher in videos produced by medical institutions ( P = .0104), not selling specific products ( P = .007) and not promoting alternative medicine ( P = .0002). The number of subscribers was an independent predictor of views/month ( P < .0001). Conclusion: Patients may be exposed to videos of poor quality when searching for information about ED on YouTube. The medical community needs to adapt a strategy to improve the quality of online medical information.