Araştırma Çıktıları
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/11443/931
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Item The Reliability of Turkish ``Basic Life Support'' and ``Cardiac Massage'' Videos Uploaded to Websites(AVES, 2016-01-01) Elicabuk, Hayri; Yaylaci, Serpil; Yilmaz, Atakan; Hatipoglu, Celile; Kaya, F. Gokhan; Serinken, MustafaObjective: In this study, the reliability of Turkish cardiac massage and Basic Life Support (BLS) videos, which have already been downloaded from three website such as YouTube, Google, Yahoo following the publication of 2010 cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) guideline and their suitability to the same guideline were researched. Materials and Methods: The videos uploaded to the three website to search videos on internet were queried by using the keywords ``cardiac massage{''} and ``basic life support{''}. Videos that had been uploaded between January 2011 and July 2014 were analyzed and scored by two experienced emergency specialists. Results: A total of 1126 videos were obtained. 1029 of the videos (91.4\%) were excluded by researchers. 97 videos were detected to accord with study criteria. Despite most of the videos were found on Google website by keywords, the enormous part of videos proper to criteria were sourced from YouTube website (n=65, 67.0\%). One fourth of the videos (24.7\%) were observed to not be suitable for 2010 CPR guideline. AED usage was mentioned slightly in the videos (14.4\%). Median score of the videos is 5 (IQR: 4-6). The rate and scores of the videos uploaded by official institution or association were significantly higher than others (p=0.007 and 0.006, respectively). Moreover, scores of the videos compatible with guidelines uploaded by official institution or association and medical personal were also found higher (p=0.001). Conclusion: Eventually, all the data obtained in this study support that Turkish videos were not reliable on the subject of BLS and cardiac massage. It is promising that videos with high followup rates also have been scored higher.Item Assessment of the Quality and Reliability of the Information on Rotator Cuff Repair on YouTube(ELSEVIER MASSON, CORP OFF, 2020-01-01) Celik, Haluk; Polat, Omer; Ozcan, Cagri; Camur, Savas; Kilinc, Bekir Eray; Uzun, MetinIntroduction: YouTube has become a common health information source for patients. Recent studies have determined that videos on YouTube contain misleading and inappropriate information for different medical conditions. The aim of the present study was to assess the quality and reliability of videos pertaining to rotator cuff (RC) repair surgery. Hypothesis: YouTube users prefer watching videos with high educational quality which are provided by physicians. Material and methods: A search was performed using keywords ``rotator cuff surgery{''} and ``rotator cuff repair{''} on YouTube and the first 100 videos for each keyword were analyzed. Video source, time since upload, duration, and number of views, likes, and dislikes were recorded. Video popularity was reported using the video power index (VPI) and view ratio. Video educational quality was measured using the recognized DISCERN, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) score and a novel RC-specific score (RCSS). Results: Among the 200 videos identified, 67 were included. The mean duration was 7.7 minutes and the mean number of the views was 147,430. Videos uploaded by a physician had significantly higher DISCERN, JAMA, and RCSS (p < 0.001). While the main video source was physicians (48\%), the most popular videos were uploaded by patients and commercial websites, according to the VPI and view ratios. The number of likes, view ratios, and VPI were negatively correlated with each score. There were negative correlations between duration and VPI scores, and positive correlations with DISCERN, JAMA score, and RCSS. Animated videos showed significantly lower results for all quality scores (p <0.05), while their VPI was significantly higher (p < 0.01). Discussion: Online information on RC repair surgery provided by YouTube was low quality, despite being mostly uploaded by physicians and having relatively higher quality scores. YouTube users prefer watching low quality videos which were provided by patients and commercial websites. (C) 2019 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.