Qualitative Assessment of Medical Information on YouTube: A Multilingual Comparison of Common Urological Conditions.

INTRODUCTION: Patients nowadays often search video-sharing platforms for online patient education materials. Since previous assessments of urological videos were limited to English, we systematically assessed the quality of videos on treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), prostate cancer (PCa), and urinary stone disease (USD) in 4 different languages on YouTube using validated instruments. METHODS: The search for videos on YouTube addressing treatment options of BPH, PCa, and USD was performed in October 2020 in -English, French, German, and Italian. Assessed parameters included basic data (e.g., number of views), grade of misinformation, and reporting of conflicts of interest. Quality of content was analyzed using the validated DISCERN questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 240 videos (60 videos in each language) were analyzed. Videos on USD in English had the highest number of views (median views 271,878 [65,313-2,513,007]). The median overall quality of videos assessed showed a moderate quality (2.5-3.4 points out of 5 points for DISCERN item 16). Median total DISCERN score of all videos divided by language showed very similar results: English (39.75 points), French (38 points), German (39.5 points), and Italian (39 points). Comparing the different diseases, videos about BPH showed the highest median scores, especially in German language (median score 43.25 points). CONCLUSIONS: Videos concerning the treatment of BPH, PCa, and USD have a low to moderate quality of content, with no differences seen between the languages assessed. These findings further support the notion of improved patient information materials on video platforms such as YouTube.

Systematic assessment of information about surgical urinary stone treatment on YouTube.

PURPOSE: To systematically assess the quality of videos on the surgical treatment of urinary stones available on YouTube using validated instruments. METHODS: A systematic search for videos on YouTube addressing treatment options of urinary stones was performed in October 2019. Assessed parameters included basic data (e.g. number of views), the grade of misinformation reporting of conflicts of interest. Quality of content was analyzed using the validated DISCERN questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 100 videos with a median of 26,234 views (1020-1,720,521) were included in the analysis. Of these, only 26 videos were rated to contain no misinformation and only nine disclosed potential conflicts of interest. Overall, the median quality of the videos was low (2 out of 5 points for DISCERN question 16). Videos uploaded by healthcare professionals and medical societies/organizations offered significantly higher levels of quality. In particular, the videos provided by the EAU achieved the highest rating with a median score of 3.0. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of videos concerning the surgical treatment of urinary stones have a low quality of content, are potentially subject to commercial bias and do not report on conflicts of interest. Videos provided by medical societies, such as the EAU, provide a higher level of quality. This highlights the importance of active recommendation of evidence-based patient education materials.

Readability assessment of commonly used urological questionnaires.

Purpose: This study was performed to assess readability of the most commonly used questionnaires in urology including a separate analysis of their single-items to identify questions that might be especially demanding for patients. Materials and Methods: The guidelines of the European Association of Urology were screened for recommended questionnaires. Readability was analyzed for complete questionnaires as well as their single-items separately using well established readability assessment tools, including Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook grade level (SMOG), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), Gunning-Fog Index, and the Flesch Reading Ease formula. Results: A total of 13 questionnaires were included to the analysis. Calculation of grade levels (FKGL, SMOG, CLI, FGI) showed readability scores of 2.7th to 16.7th grade. Easiest readability as calculated by median grade levels was found for the short form of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaires-Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms short form (FLUTS-SF) while the short form of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) showed the hardest readability. Based on the FKGL between 0% (FLUTS-SF) and 80% (IIEF-5) of the single-items were written above the recommended grade levels. Conclusions: The questionnaires that are used most frequently in urology mainly show a satisfactory overall readability. Inadequate readability levels were not only found for individual questionnaires but also for single-items of the majority of assessed questionnaires. This requires consideration for the interpretation of results and when developing novel health-related surveys.