Youtube and Eosinophilic Esophagitis: an Assessment of the Educational Quality of Information
2017
- 16Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage16
- Abstract Views16
Lecture / Presentation Description
Introduction: Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) is a rare allergic inflammatory disease affecting approximately 1-4 in every 10,000 individuals in the United States. With the dramatic increase in prevalence of EoE in recent years and the increasing use of the internet as a source of health care information, we sought to evaluate the educational quality of EoE videos on YouTube. Methods: We performed a YouTube search using the keyword “eosinophilic esophagitis” from September 8-27, 2016. All available videos were included and analyzed for video characteristics, source, and content. Source was further classified as health-care provider, alternative-medicine provider, patient and/or patient's parents, company, media, or professional society. A scoring system was created based on current guidelines to evaluate the quality of information (-10 to +30 points).Negative points were assigned for misleading information. Six blinded reviewers scored each video independently. Results: Two hundred and nine videos were analyzed, with a median of 507 views, 1 like, 0 dislikes, and 0 comments. More video presenters were male (50.9%), and the most commonly depicted race was Caucasian (73.6%). The most common type of video source was professional society (39.7%), and the least represented video source was company and media (8.6%). Among the four video sources, the mean scores showed a statistically significant difference from each other (pConclusion: Youtube videos on EoE were shown to be a poor source of valid health care information. Videos by health care providers were a better source of information compared to other sources. This study reiterates the need for higher quality educational videos on EoE by the medical community.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know