Factors influencing smartwatch use and comfort with health data sharing: a sequential mixed-method study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Smartwatches have become ubiquitous for tracking health metrics. These data sets hold substantial potential for enhancing healthcare and public health initiatives; it may be used to track chronic health conditions, detect previously undiagnosed health conditions and better understand public health trends. By first understanding the factors influencing one's continuous use of the device, it will be advantageous to assess factors that may influence a person's willingness to share their individual data sets. This study seeks to comprehensively understand the factors influencing the continued use of these devices and people's willingness to share the health data they generate. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A two-section online survey of smartwatch users over the age of 18 will be conducted (n ≥200). The first section, based on the expectation-confirmation model, will assess factors influencing continued use of smartwatches while the second section will assess willingness to share the health data generated from these devices. Survey data will be analysed descriptively and based on structural equation modelling.Subsequently, six focus groups will be conducted to further understand the issues raised in the survey. Each focus group (n=6) will consist of three smartwatch users: a general practitioner, a public health specialist and an IT specialist. Young smartwatch users (aged 18-44) will be included in three of the focus groups and middle-aged smartwatch users (aged 45-64) will be included in the other three groups. This is to enhance comparison of opinions based on age groups. Data from the focus groups will be analysed using the microinterlocutor approach and an executive summary.After the focus group, participants will complete a brief survey to indicate any changes in their opinions resulting from the discussion. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results of this study will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, and all associated data will be deposited in a relevant, publicly accessible data repository to ensure transparency and facilitate future research endeavours.This study was approved by the Social Research Ethic Committee (SREC), University College Cork-SREC/SOM/21062023/2.

News and misinformation consumption: A temporal comparison across European countries.

The Internet and social media have transformed the information landscape, democratizing content access and production. While making information easily accessible, these platforms can also act as channels for spreading misinformation, posing crucial societal challenges. To address this, understanding news consumption patterns and unraveling the complexities of the online information environment are essential. Previous studies highlight polarization and misinformation in online discussions, but many focus on specific topics or contexts, often overlooking comprehensive cross-country and cross-topic analyses. However, the dynamics of debates, misinformation prevalence, and the efficacy of countermeasures are intrinsically tied to socio-cultural contexts. This work aims to bridge this gap by exploring information consumption patterns across four European countries over three years. Analyzing the Twitter activity of news outlets in France, Germany, Italy, and the UK, this study seeks to shed light on how topics of European significance resonate across these nations and the role played by misinformation sources. The results spotlight that while reliable sources predominantly shape the information landscape, unreliable content persists across all countries and topics. Though most users favor trustworthy sources, a small percentage predominantly consumes content from questionable sources, with even fewer maintaining a mixed information diet. The cross-country comparison unravels disparities in audience overlap among news sources, the prevalence of misinformation, and the proportion of users relying on questionable sources. Such distinctions surface not only across countries but also within various topics. These insights underscore the pressing need for tailored studies, crucial in designing targeted and effective countermeasures against misinformation and extreme polarization in the digital space.

Workflow for detecting biomedical articles with underlying open and restricted-access datasets.

To monitor the sharing of research data through repositories is increasingly of interest to institutions and funders, as well as from a meta-research perspective. Automated screening tools exist, but they are based on either narrow or vague definitions of open data. Where manual validation has been performed, it was based on a small article sample. At our biomedical research institution, we developed detailed criteria for such a screening, as well as a workflow which combines an automated and a manual step, and considers both fully open and restricted-access data. We use the results for an internal incentivization scheme, as well as for a monitoring in a dashboard. Here, we describe in detail our screening procedure and its validation, based on automated screening of 11035 biomedical research articles, of which 1381 articles with potential data sharing were subsequently screened manually. The screening results were highly reliable, as witnessed by inter-rater reliability values of ≥0.8 (Krippendorff's alpha) in two different validation samples. We also report the results of the screening, both for our institution and an independent sample from a meta-research study. In the largest of the three samples, the 2021 institutional sample, underlying data had been openly shared for 7.8% of research articles. For an additional 1.0% of articles, restricted-access data had been shared, resulting in 8.3% of articles overall having open and/or restricted-access data. The extraction workflow is then discussed with regard to its applicability in different contexts, limitations, possible variations, and future developments. In summary, we present a comprehensive, validated, semi-automated workflow for the detection of shared research data underlying biomedical article publications.

Identifying strategies to support implementation of interprofessional primary care teams in Nova Scotia: Results of a survey and knowledge sharing event.

BACKGROUND: Interprofessional primary care teams (IPCTs) work together to enhance care. Despite evidence on the benefits of IPCTs, implementation remains challenging. This research aims to 1) identify and prioritize barriers and enablers, and 2) co-develop team-level strategies to support IPCT implementation in Nova Scotia, Canada. METHODS: Healthcare providers and staff of IPCTs were invited to complete an online survey to identify barriers and enablers, and the degree to which each item impacted the functioning of their team. Top ranked items were identified using the sum of frequency x impact for each response. A virtual knowledge sharing event was held to identify strategies to address local barriers and enablers that impact team functioning. RESULTS: IPCT members (n = 117), with a mix of clinic roles and experience, completed the survey. The top three enablers identified were access to technological tools to support their role, standardized processes for using the technological tools, and having a team manager to coordinate collaboration. The top three barriers were limited opportunity for daily team communication, lack of conflict resolution strategies, and lack of capacity building opportunities. IPCT members, administrators, and patients attended the knowledge sharing event (n = 33). Five strategies were identified including: 1) balancing patient needs and provider scope of practice, 2) holding regular and accessible meetings, 3) supporting team development opportunities, 4) supporting professional development, and 5) supporting involvement in non-clinical activities. INTERPRETATION: This research contextualized evidence to further understand local perspectives and experiences of barriers and enablers to the implementation of IPCTs. The knowledge exchange event identified actionable strategies that IPCTs and healthcare administrators can tailor to support teams and care for patients.

Does Reader Engagement with Neurosurgery Journal Websites Correlate with the Number of Citations Received by Articles?

BACKGROUND: Medicine has begun adapting to new information-sharing paradigms in the hyper-connected social media era. In this milieu, the role of journal websites in the dissemination of clinical and research information needs to be reevaluated. OBJECTIVE: We sought to explore whether reader engagement with neurosurgical journal websites, reflected by the number of article views and downloads, correlated with the eventual number of citations received by the articles. METHODS: The websites of all Medline indexed neurosurgical journals were screened to identify those that provided information regarding the number of abstract and full text views and downloads. Articles published in these journals between July 2010 and June 2011 were included in this analysis. Various article attributes were identified and the number of citations per article was obtained from Google Scholar. The impact factors of the selected journals for the year 2010 were obtained from the Journal Citation Reports. RESULTS: Twenty-two journals that had published 2527 articles were finally included in this analysis. The number of abstract views, full-text views, and downloads all correlated strongly with the journal impact factors in 2010 as well as the eventual citations per article. The number of article downloads independently predicted the citations per article on multivariate analysis. Neurology India had significantly higher article views and downloads but lower citations per article than the other journals. CONCLUSIONS: Readers were found to engage significantly with neurosurgical journal websites and therefore, open access to articles would lead to increased visibility of articles, resulting in higher citation rates.

Nudge-based misinformation interventions are effective in information environments with low misinformation prevalence.

Nudge-based misinformation interventions are presented as cheap and effective ways to reduce the spread of misinformation online. However, despite online information environments typically containing relatively low volumes of misinformation, most studies testing the effectiveness of nudge interventions present equal proportions of true and false information. As the effectiveness of nudges can be highly context-dependent, it is imperative to validate the effectiveness of nudge-based interventions in environments with more realistic proportions of misinformation. The current study (N = 1387) assessed the effectiveness of a combined accuracy and social-norm nudge in simulated social-media environments with varying proportions of misinformation (50%, 20%, and 12.5%) relative to true and non-news-based (i.e., "social") information. The nudge intervention was effective at improving sharing discernment in conditions with lower proportions of misinformation, providing ecologically valid support for the use of nudge-based interventions to counter misinformation propagation on social media.

Using an epidemiological model to explore the interplay between sharing and advertising in viral videos.

How to exploit social networks to make internet content spread rapidly and consistently is an interesting question in marketing management. Although epidemic models have been employed to comprehend the spread dynamics of internet content, such as viral videos, the effects of advertising and individual sharing on information dissemination are difficult to distinguish. This gap forbids us to evaluate the efficiency of marketing strategies. In this paper, we modify a classic mean-field SIR (susceptible-infected-recovered) model, incorporating the influences of sharing and advertising in viral videos. We mathematically analyze the global stability of the system and propose an agent-based modeling approach to evaluate the efficiency of sharing and advertising. We further provide a case study of music videos on YouTube to show the validity of our model.

Online dissemination of Cochrane reviews on digital health technologies: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: This cross-sectional study investigated the online dissemination of Cochrane reviews on digital health technologies. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception up to May 2023. Cochrane reviews with any population (P), intervention or concept supported by any digital technology (I), any or no comparison (C), and any health outcome (O) were included. Data on review characteristics (bibliographic information, PICO, and evidence quality) and dissemination strategies were extracted and processed. Dissemination was assessed using review information on the Cochrane website and Altmetric data that trace the mentions of academic publications in nonacademic online channels. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Out of 170 records identified in the search, 100 Cochrane reviews, published between 2005 and 2023, were included. The reviews focused on consumers (e.g. patients, n = 86), people of any age (n = 44), and clinical populations (n = 68). All reviews addressed interventions or concepts supported by digital technologies with any devices (n = 73), mobile devices (n = 17), or computers (n = 10). The outcomes focused on disease treatment (n = 56), health promotion and disease prevention (n = 27), or management of care delivery (n = 17). All reviews included 1-132 studies, and half included 1-10 studies. Meta-analysis was performed in 69 reviews, and certainty of evidence was rated as high or moderate for at least one outcome in 46 reviews. In agreement with the Cochrane guidelines, all reviews had a plain language summary (PLS) that was available in 3-14 languages. The reviews were disseminated (i.e. mentioned online) predominantly via X/Twitter (n = 99) and Facebook (n = 69). Overall, 51 reviews were mentioned in up to 25% and 49 reviews in 5% of all research outputs traced by Altmetric data. Dissemination (i.e. higher Altmetric scores) was associated with bibliographic review characteristics (i.e. earlier publication year and PLS available in more languages), but not with evidence quality (i.e. certainty of evidence rating, number of studies, or meta-analysis performed in review). CONCLUSIONS: Online attention towards Cochrane reviews on digital health technologies is high. Dissemination is higher for older reviews and reviews with more PLS translations. Measures are required to improve dissemination of Cochrane reviews based on evidence quality. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The study was prospectively registered at the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/mpw8u/ ).

Sharing insect data through GBIF: novel monitoring methods, opportunities and standards.

Technological advancements in biological monitoring have facilitated the study of insect communities at unprecedented spatial scales. The progress allows more comprehensive coverage of the diversity within a given area while minimizing disturbance and reducing the need for extensive human labour. Compared with traditional methods, these novel technologies offer the opportunity to examine biological patterns that were previously beyond our reach. However, to address the pressing scientific inquiries of the future, data must be easily accessible, interoperable and reusable for the global research community. Biodiversity information standards and platforms provide the necessary infrastructure to standardize and share biodiversity data. This paper explores the possibilities and prerequisites of publishing insect data obtained through novel monitoring methods through GBIF, the most comprehensive global biodiversity data infrastructure. We describe the essential components of metadata standards and existing data standards for occurrence data on insects, including data extensions. By addressing the current opportunities, limitations, and future development of GBIF's publishing framework, we hope to encourage researchers to both share data and contribute to the further development of biodiversity data standards and publishing models. Wider commitments to open data initiatives will promote data interoperability and support cross-disciplinary scientific research and key policy indicators. This article is part of the theme issue 'Towards a toolkit for global insect biodiversity monitoring'.

Difference in Rumor Dissemination and Debunking Before and After the Relaxation of COVID-19 Prevention and Control Measures in China: Infodemiology Study.

BACKGROUND: The information epidemic emerged along with the COVID-19 pandemic. While controlling the spread of COVID-19, the secondary harm of epidemic rumors to social order cannot be ignored. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper was to understand the characteristics of rumor dissemination before and after the pandemic and the corresponding rumor management and debunking mechanisms. This study aimed to provide a theoretical basis and effective methods for relevant departments to establish a sound mechanism for managing network rumors related to public health emergencies such as COVID-19. METHODS: This study collected data sets of epidemic rumors before and after the relaxation of the epidemic prevention and control measures, focusing on large-scale network rumors. Starting from 3 dimensions of rumor content construction, rumor propagation, and rumor-refuting response, the epidemic rumors were subdivided into 7 categories, namely, involved subjects, communication content, emotional expression, communication channels, communication forms, rumor-refuting subjects, and verification sources. Based on this framework, content coding and statistical analysis of epidemic rumors were carried out. RESULTS: The study found that the rumor information was primarily directed at a clear target audience. The main themes of rumor dissemination were related to the public's immediate interests in the COVID-19 field, with significant differences in emotional expression and mostly negative emotions. Rumors mostly spread through social media interactions, community dissemination, and circle dissemination, with text content as the main form, but they lack factual evidence. The preferences of debunking subjects showed differences, and the frequent occurrence of rumors reflected the unsmooth channels of debunking. The χ2 test of data before and after the pandemic showed that the P value was less than .05, indicating that the difference in rumor content before and after the pandemic had statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: This study's results showed that the themes of rumors during the pandemic are closely related to the immediate interests of the public, and the emotions of the public accelerate the spread of these rumors, which are mostly disseminated through social networks. Therefore, to more effectively prevent and control the spread of rumors during the pandemic and to enhance the capability to respond to public health crises, relevant authorities should strengthen communication with the public, conduct emotional risk assessments, and establish a joint mechanism for debunking rumors.

Contents analysis of thyroid cancer-related information uploaded to YouTube by physicians in Korea: endorsing thyroid cancer screening, potentially leading to overdiagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Thyroid cancer overdiagnosis is a major public health issue in South Korea, which has the highest incidence rate. The accessibility of information through the Internet, particularly on YouTube, could potentially impact excessive screening. This study aimed to analyze the content of thyroid cancer-related YouTube videos, particularly those from 2016 onwards, to evaluate the potential spread of misinformation. METHODS: A total of 326 videos for analysis were collected using a video search protocol with the keyword "thyroid cancer" on YouTube. This study classified the selected YouTube videos as either provided by medical professionals or not and used topic clustering with LDA (latent dirichlet allocation), sentiment analysis with KoBERT (Korean bidirectional encoder representations from transformers), and reliability evaluation to analyze the content. The proportion of mentions of poor prognosis for thyroid cancer and the categorization of advertising content was also analyzed. RESULTS: Videos by medical professionals were categorized into 7 topics, with "Thyroid cancer is not a 'Good cancer'" being the most common. The number of videos opposing excessive thyroid cancer screening decreased gradually yearly. Videos advocating screening received more favorable comments from viewers than videos opposing excessive thyroid cancer screening. Patient experience videos were categorized into 6 topics, with the "Treatment process and after-treatment" being the most common. CONCLUSION: This study found that a significant proportion of videos uploaded by medical professionals on thyroid cancer endorse the practice, potentially leading to excessive treatments. The study highlights the need for medical professionals to provide high-quality and unbiased information on social media platforms to prevent the spread of medical misinformation and the need for criteria to judge the content and quality of online health information.

Dacryocystorhinostomy videos on YouTube as a source of patient education.

BACKGROUND: To determine the quality and reliability of DCR YouTube videos as patient education resources and identify any associated factors predictive of video quality. METHODS: A YouTube search was conducted using the terms "Dacryocystorhinostomy, DCR, surgery" on 12th of January 2022, with the first 50 relevant videos selected for inclusion. For each video, the following was collected: video hyperlink, title, total views, months since the video was posted, video length, total likes/dislikes, authorship (i.e. surgeon, patient experience or media companies) and number of comments. The videos were graded independently by a resident, a registrar and an oculoplastic surgeon using three validated scoring systems: the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), DISCERN, and Health on the Net (HON). RESULTS: The average number of video views was 22,992, with the mean length being 488.12 s and an average of 18 comments per video. The consensus JAMA, DISCERN and HON scores were 2.1 ± 0.6, 29.1 ± 8.8 and 2.7 ± 1.0, respectively. This indicated that the included videos were of a low quality, however, only DISCERN scores had good interobserver similarity. Videos posted by surgeons were superior to non-surgeons when considering mean JAMA and HON scores. No other factors were associated with the quality of educational content. CONCLUSION: The quality and reliability of DCR related content for patient education is relatively low. Based on this study's findings, patients should be encouraged to view videos created by surgeons or specialists in preference to other sources on YouTube.

A study on formalizing the knowledge of data curation activities across different fields.

In recent years, with the trend of open science, there have been many efforts to share research data on the internet. To promote research data sharing, data curation is essential to make the data interpretable and reusable. In research fields such as life sciences, earth sciences, and social sciences, tasks and procedures have been already developed to implement efficient data curation to meet the needs and customs of individual research fields. However, not only data sharing within research fields but also interdisciplinary data sharing is required to promote open science. For this purpose, knowledge of data curation across the research fields is surveyed, analyzed, and organized as an ontology in this paper. As the survey, existing vocabularies and procedures are collected and compared as well as interviews with the data curators in research institutes in different fields are conducted to clarify commonalities and differences in data curation across the research fields. It turned out that the granularity of tasks and procedures that constitute the building blocks of data curation is not formalized. Without a method to overcome this gap, it will be challenging to promote interdisciplinary reuse of research data. Based on the analysis above, the ontology for the data curation process is proposed to describe data curation processes in different fields universally. It is described by OWL and shown as valid and consistent from the logical viewpoint. The ontology successfully represents data curation activities as the processes in the different fields acquired by the interviews. It is also helpful to identify the functions of the systems to support the data curation process. This study contributes to building a knowledge framework for an interdisciplinary understanding of data curation activities in different fields.

Seek and you may (not) find: A multi-institutional analysis of where research data are shared.

Research data sharing has become an expected component of scientific research and scholarly publishing practice over the last few decades, due in part to requirements for federally funded research. As part of a larger effort to better understand the workflows and costs of public access to research data, this project conducted a high-level analysis of where academic research data is most frequently shared. To do this, we leveraged the DataCite and Crossref application programming interfaces (APIs) in search of Publisher field elements demonstrating which data repositories were utilized by researchers from six academic research institutions between 2012-2022. In addition, we also ran a preliminary analysis of the quality of the metadata associated with these published datasets, comparing the extent to which information was missing from metadata fields deemed important for public access to research data. Results show that the top 10 publishers accounted for 89.0% to 99.8% of the datasets connected with the institutions in our study. Known data repositories, including institutional data repositories hosted by those institutions, were initially lacking from our sample due to varying metadata standards and practices. We conclude that the metadata quality landscape for published research datasets is uneven; key information, such as author affiliation, is often incomplete or missing from source data repositories and aggregators. To enhance the findability, interoperability, accessibility, and reusability (FAIRness) of research data, we provide a set of concrete recommendations that repositories and data authors can take to improve scholarly metadata associated with shared datasets.

'Kindling the fire' of NHS patient data exploitations: The care.data controversy in news media discourses.

This paper explores news media discourse about care.data: an NHS England programme of work for amalgamating and sharing patient data from primary care for planning and research. It was scrapped in 2016 after three years of public outcry, delays and around 1.5 million opt-outs. I examine UK news media coverage of this programme through the 'fire object' metaphor, focusing upon the visions of purpose and value it inspired, the abrupt discontinuities, juxtapositions and transformations it performed, and the matters of concern that went unheeded. Findings suggest that, in care.data's pursuit of a societal consensus on NHS patient data exploitations, various visions for new and fluid data flows brought to presence narratives of transforming the NHS, saving lives, and growing the economy. Other realities and concerns that mattered for certain stakeholders, such as data ownership and commercialisation, public engagement and informed consent, commitment and leadership, operational capabilities, and NHS privatisation agendas, remained absent or unsettled. False dichotomies kept the controversy alive, sealing its fate. I conclude by arguing that such failed programmes can turn into phantom-like objects, haunting future patient data schemes of similar aspirations. The paper highlights the role news media can have in understanding such energetic public controversies.

Agricultural education in Africa using YouTube multilingual animations: A retrospective feasibility study assessing costs to reach language-diverse populations.

There is a critical need for widespread information dissemination of agricultural best practices in Africa. Literacy, language and resource barriers often impede such information dissemination. Culturally and linguistically localized, computer-animated training videos placed on YouTube and promoted through paid advertising is a potential tool to help overcome these barriers. The goal of this study is to assess the feasibility of reaching language-diverse populations in Africa using this new type of information dissemination channel. As a case study, cost estimates were obtained for YouTube ad campaigns of a video to prevent post-harvest loss through safe food storage using sanitized jerrycan containers. Seventy-three video variants were created for the most common 16 languages in Ghana, 35 languages in Kenya, and 22 languages in Nigeria. Using these videos, campaigns were deployed country wide or focused on zones of influence that represent economically underdeveloped regions known to produce beans suitable for jerrycan storage. Using data collected from YouTube ad campaigns, language-specific models were created for each country to estimate how many viewers could be reached per US dollar spent. Separate models were created to estimate the number of viewers who watched 25% and 75% of the video (most of video without end credits), reflecting different levels of engagement. For language campaigns with both country wide and zone of influence areas of deployment, separate region-specific models were created. Models showed that the estimated number of viewers per dollar spent varied considerably amongst countries and languages. On average, the expected number of viewers per dollar spent were 1.8 (Range = 0.2-7.3) for 25% watched and 0.8 (Range = 0.1-3.2) for 75% watched in Ghana, 1.2 (0.2-4.8) for 25% watched and 0.5 (Range = 0.1-2.0) for 75% watched in Kenya, and 0.4 (Range = 0.2-1.3) for 25% watched and 0.2 (Range = 0.1-0.5) for 75% watched in Nigeria. English versions of the video were the most cost-effective in reaching viewers in Ghana and Nigeria. In Kenya, English language campaigns ranked 28 (country wide) and 36 (zones of influence) out of 37 analyzed campaigns. Results also showed that many local language campaigns performed well, opening the possibility that targeted knowledge dissemination on topics of importance to local populations, is potentially cost effective. In addition, such targeted information dissemination appears feasible, even during regional and global crises when in-person training may not be possible. In summary, leveraging multilingual computer-animations and digital platforms such as YouTube shows promise for conducting large-scale agricultural education campaigns. The findings of the current study provides the justification to pursue a more rigorous prospective study to verify the efficacy of knowledge exchange and societal impact through this form of information dissemination channel.

A quality assessment of YouTube as an information resource for tonsillectomy.

PURPOSE: Online resources are increasingly being utilised by patients to guide their clinical decision making, as an alternative or supplement to the traditional clinical-patient relationship. YouTube is an online repository of user and community generated videos, which is one of the most popular websites globally. We undertook a study to examine the quality of information presented in YouTube videos related to tonsillectomy. METHODS: We completed a systematic search of YouTube in May 2023 and identified 88 videos for inclusion in our study. Videos were published in the English language, focussing on tonsillectomy and tonsillectomy recovery, and were greater than 2 min in length. We recorded video quality metrics and two authors independently analysed the quality of information using three validated quality assessment tools described in the literature including the modified DISCERN, Global Quality Score, and the JAMA Benchmark Criteria. RESULTS: The overall quality of the information was low with mean quality scores of Modified DISCERN (1.8 ± 1.3), GQS (2.6 ± 1.2), and JAMA Benchmark Criteria (1.6 ± 0.7). Information published by medical sources including medical professionals, healthcare organisations, and medical education channels scored significantly higher compared to non-medical sources across all quality measures and were of moderate overall quality and usefulness: Modified DISCERN (2.5 ± 1.1 vs 0.8 ± 0.9, z = -6.0, p < 0.001), GQS (3.2 ± 1.0 vs 1.7 ± 0.9, z = -5.7, p < 0.001), and JAMA (1.9 ± 0.8 vs 1.1 ± 0.3, z = -5.2, p < 0.001). Videos published during or after 2018 scored higher on Modified DISCERN (z = -3.2,p = 0.001) but not on GQS or JAMA. Video quality metrics such as total view count, likes, and comments, and channel subscriber count, did not correlate with higher video quality. However, amongst videos published by authoritative medical sources, total view count correlated positively with higher Modified DISCERN quality scores (p = 0.037). CONCLUSION: The overall quality and usefulness of YouTube videos on tonsillectomy is of low quality, but information published by authoritative medical sources score significantly higher. Clinicians should be mindful of increasing use of online information sources such as YouTube when counselling patients. Further research is needed in the medical community to create engaging, high-quality content to provide guidance for patients.

Assessing the Reliability of Facial Feminization Content on Social Media and Its Impact on the Dissemination of Misinformation.

BACKGROUND: The surge in social media usage has transformed the dissemination and consumption of healthcare information, notably impacting plastic surgery and cosmetic specialties. This study focuses on the influence of social media, particularly Instagram and TikTok, in shaping perceptions of individuals seeking facial feminization (FF) procedures. METHODS: Using the validated DISCERN scale, we assessed the reliability and accuracy of FF content on TikTok and Instagram. The study also analyzed the relationship between content reliability on engagement metrics (likes, comments, views) and the type of content shared (educational, testimonial, promotional). RESULTS: The analysis encompassed 225 TikTok videos and 75 Instagram posts. TikTok content showed 9.33% as "very poor," 66.2% as "poor," 22.6% as "fair," and only 1.33% as "excellent." Similarly, Instagram content demonstrated 14.67% as "very poor" and 69.33% as "poor," with no content rated as "good" or "excellent." Educational content received higher reliability scores on both platforms. TikTok engagement metrics showed lower reliability ratings correlating with more views, comments, and likes. CONCLUSION: The study underscores the critical role of social media in shaping patient perspectives on FF procedures. The prevalence of inaccurate information necessitates a focus on responsible engagement by healthcare professionals, aiming to provide accurate, educational content that aligns with patients' informational needs and ultimately enhances surgical outcomes.

Advancing data honesty in experimental biology.

The ease with which scientific data, particularly certain types of raw data in experimental biology, can be fabricated without trace begs urgent attention. This is thought to be a widespread problem across the academic world, where published results are the major currency, incentivizing publication of (usually positive) results at the cost of lax scientific rigor and even fraudulent data. Although solutions to improve data sharing and methodological transparency are increasingly being implemented, the inability to detect dishonesty within raw data remains an inherent flaw in the way in which we judge research. We therefore propose that one solution would be the development of a non-modifiable raw data format that could be published alongside scientific results; a format that would enable data authentication from the earliest stages of experimental data collection. A further extension of this tool could allow changes to the initial original version to be tracked, so every reviewer and reader could follow the logical footsteps of the author and detect unintentional errors or intentional manipulations of the data. Were such a tool to be developed, we would not advocate its use as a prerequisite for journal submission; rather, we envisage that authors would be given the option to provide such authentication. Only authors who did not manipulate or fabricate their data can provide the original data without risking discovery, so the mere choice to do so already increases their credibility (much like 'honest signaling' in animals). We strongly believe that such a tool would enhance data honesty and encourage more reliable science.