Quality of Online Video Resources Concerning Patient Education for the Meniscus: A YouTube-Based Quality-Control Study
- PMID: 31864582
- DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.07.033
Quality of Online Video Resources Concerning Patient Education for the Meniscus: A YouTube-Based Quality-Control Study
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the reliability and educational content of YouTube videos concerning the menisci.
Methods: YouTube was queried using the keyword "meniscus." The first 50 videos were evaluated. Eleven video characteristics were extracted, and videos were categorized by source and content. Video reliability was assessed using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria (score range, 0-5). Video educational content was assessed using the Global Quality Score (GQS; score range, 0-4) and a meniscus-specific score (MSS; score range, 0-20).
Results: The mean video duration was 551.44 ± 1,046.04 seconds (range, 75-7,282 seconds). The mean number of views was 288,597.7 ± 735,275.9. Collectively, the 50 videos accrued 14,141,285 views. The mean JAMA score, GQS, and MSS were 1.55, 2.12, and 3.67, respectively. The video source was predominately non-physician based (24.49% of source uploaders), whereas video content was predominately concerned with disease information (37.50% of content). Significant between-group effects were observed for the JAMA score and video content (P = .0155), with videos concerning disease information, exercise training, and nonsurgical intervention having the highest mean JAMA scores. Significant between-group effects were also observed for the JAMA score based on video upload source (P < .001), with videos uploaded by physicians receiving the highest mean JAMA scores. The mean GQS and MSS were significantly greater for videos categorized as having disease-specific content (P = .0377 and P = .0404, respectively) and for physician video uploaders (P = .0133 and P = .0100, respectively). The number of video dislikes was a negative independent predictor of the JAMA score (β = -0.007, P = .003). Disease-specific content was a positive independent predictor of the GQS (β = 1.13, P = .042). There were no independent predictors of the MSS.
Conclusions: Information on the meniscus found in YouTube videos is of low quality and reliability.
Clinical relevance: Orthopaedic health practitioners should caution patients about the inaccuracy of YouTube videos regarding the meniscus given the low quality of content. These health care providers should make efforts to provide patients with higher-quality alternatives.
Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Editorial Commentary: YouTube Meniscus Videos Have Poor Reliability and Quality: Videos Uploaded by Physicians Are Evidence-Based Superior and Show Few "Dislikes".Arthroscopy. 2020 Jan;36(1):239-240. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.10.006. Arthroscopy. 2020. PMID: 31864583
Similar articles
-
Quality of online video resources concerning patient education for neck pain: A YouTube-based quality-control study.Front Public Health. 2022 Sep 21;10:972348. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.972348. eCollection 2022. Front Public Health. 2022. PMID: 36211682 Free PMC article.
-
Analysis of the quality, reliability, and popularity of information on strabismus on YouTube.Strabismus. 2020 Dec;28(4):175-180. doi: 10.1080/09273972.2020.1836002. Epub 2020 Oct 19. Strabismus. 2020. PMID: 33074741
-
YouTube as a Source of Information About the Posterior Cruciate Ligament: A Content-Quality and Reliability Analysis.Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2019 Nov 27;1(2):e109-e114. doi: 10.1016/j.asmr.2019.09.003. eCollection 2019 Dec. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2019. PMID: 32266347 Free PMC article.
-
YouTube as a source of information on pediatric scoliosis: a reliability and educational quality analysis.Spine Deform. 2023 Jan;11(1):3-9. doi: 10.1007/s43390-022-00569-7. Epub 2022 Aug 20. Spine Deform. 2023. PMID: 35986883 Review.
-
A quality assessment of YouTube content on shoulder instability.Phys Sportsmed. 2022 Aug;50(4):289-294. doi: 10.1080/00913847.2021.1942286. Epub 2021 Jun 24. Phys Sportsmed. 2022. PMID: 34121601 Review.
Cited by
-
Assessing the Quality of YouTube Videos on Adhesive Capsulitis.Cureus. 2022 Jul 28;14(7):e27406. doi: 10.7759/cureus.27406. eCollection 2022 Jul. Cureus. 2022. PMID: 36046306 Free PMC article.
-
Is YouTube a reliable source of health-related information? A systematic review.BMC Med Educ. 2022 May 19;22(1):382. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03446-z. BMC Med Educ. 2022. PMID: 35590410 Free PMC article.
-
YouTube Is a Poor-Quality Source for Patient Information Regarding Patellar Dislocations.Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2023 Mar 24;5(2):e459-e464. doi: 10.1016/j.asmr.2023.01.014. eCollection 2023 Apr. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2023. PMID: 37101882 Free PMC article.
-
Cross-platform analysis of atrial fibrillation scientific videos: using composite index and a basic assessment scale.Front Public Health. 2025 Apr 25;13:1507776. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1507776. eCollection 2025. Front Public Health. 2025. PMID: 40352855 Free PMC article.
-
Quality of online video resources concerning patient education for neck pain: A YouTube-based quality-control study.Front Public Health. 2022 Sep 21;10:972348. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.972348. eCollection 2022. Front Public Health. 2022. PMID: 36211682 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources