Evaluation of YouTube Information Quality About Pes Planus

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridGüngör, Berna / 0009-0003-1126-6461
dc.authoridKuru, Tolgahan / 0000-0003-1245-6390
dc.authoridNusran, Gürdal / 0000-0002-6412-012X
dc.contributor.authorOlcar, Haci Ali
dc.contributor.authorGüngör, Berna
dc.contributor.authorKuru, Tolgahan
dc.contributor.authorAydin, Davut
dc.contributor.authorNusran, Gürdal
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-27T20:39:15Z
dc.date.available2025-01-27T20:39:15Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.departmentÇanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractBackground: The aim of this study was to measure the quality of information about flatfoot and pes planus presented online on the social media site YouTube and to determine the trends of viewers to medical information on YouTube. Methods: Flatfoot and pes planus was typed into the YouTube search module. From the search results, videos with 50,000 views or more, longer than 45 seconds, and containing information about flatfoot and pes planus disease were selected. DISCERN and JAMA scoring, daily average views, number of likes, and number of comments were collected from 53 videos that met the criteria. The profession of the sharer was evaluated in terms of the information quality of the sharing and the orientation of the audience. Results: The mean number of views per day of the examined videos was 2,047. The mean video presentation time was 8 minutes 50 seconds. The mean JAMA score was 2 of 4 and the mean DISCERN score was 38.16 of 75. According to the DISCERN score according to the professions, the video quality was moderate for doctors (41.44 +/- 12.99), moderate for physiotherapists (41.91 +/- 9.04), poor for coaches (32.78 +/- 7.87), poor for patients (34.50 +/- 5.32), and weak for others (34.89 +/- 14.00). According to the Spearman correlation between DISCERN score and mean daily viewing, significant relationships were found for the doctors ( P = .0102) and others groups ( P = .0033); however, no significant relationships were observed for the physiotherapists group ( P = .1073), the flatfoot patients group ( P = .5363), and the coaches group ( P = .9111). There were significant relationships between like and comment counts in all groups (doctors, P = .0088; coaches, P = .0069; physiotherapists, P = .0007; others, P = .0018; and patients, P = .0066). Conclusions: Looking at previous studies, it was observed that the quality of online health information was historically inadequate. Likewise, in our study on YouTube, we found that the quality of flatfoot and pes planus information was poor to moderate. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 114(2), 2024; doi:10.7547/22-168)
dc.identifier.issn8750-7315
dc.identifier.issn1930-8264
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85193457088
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12428/23903
dc.identifier.volume114
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001241202000001
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherAmer Podiatric Med Assoc
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of The American Podiatric Medical Association
dc.relation.publicationcategoryinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.snmzKA_WoS_20250125
dc.subjectInternet Resources
dc.subjectVideos
dc.subjectInjuries
dc.titleEvaluation of YouTube Information Quality About Pes Planus
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu