J Korean Med Sci.  2024 Feb;39(7):e61. 10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e61.

YouTube as a Source of Information on Public Health Ethics

• Zhaksylyk A
• Yessirkepov M
• Akyol A
• Kocyigit BF

• KMID: 2553314
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e61

Abstract

Background
Public health ethics (PHE) is a dynamic area within bioethics that addresses the complex moral implications of public health measures in the face of growing health threats. YouTube is a powerful and widely used platform for disseminating health-related information. The primary objective of this study is to assess videos related to PHE on YouTube. The aim is to gauge the extent of misinformation in collecting PHE videos on the platform.
Methods
On October 25, 2023, a thorough investigation on YouTube was undertaken, employing pre-determined search phrases involving ‘public health,’ ‘healthcare,’ ‘health services administration,’ and ‘health policy and ethics.’ The research encompassed a total of 137 videos that were selected according to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The videos were evaluated using the Global Quality Scale to measure quality and the modified DISCERN tool to evaluate reliability. The researchers identified video sources and compared several video attributes across different quality groups.
Results
A total of 137 videos were analyzed, and 65 (47.45%) were classified as high quality, 52 (37.23%) as moderate quality, and 21 (15.32%) as low quality. In high-quality videos, academic, government, physician, and university-hospital sources predominated, whereas Internet users and news sources were connected with low-quality videos. Significant differences in DISCERN score, per day views, likes, and comments were seen across the quality groups (P = 0.001 for views per day and P = 0.001 for other characteristics). According to the findings, low-quality videos had higher median values for daily views, likes, and comments.
Conclusion
Although nearly half of the videos were high-quality, low-quality videos attracted greater attention. Critical contributors to high-quality videos included academic, government, physician, and university-hospital sources. The findings highlight the importance of quality control methods on social media platforms and strategies to direct users to trustworthy health information. Authors should prioritize appropriate citations and evaluate YouTube and other comparable platforms for potential promotional low-quality information.

Keyword

Social Media; Internet; Information Science; Public Health; Ethics

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 The flowchart illustrates the process of selecting YouTube videos.

Reference

1. Abbasi M, Majdzadeh R, Zali A, Karimi A, Akrami F. The evolution of public health ethics frameworks: systematic review of moral values and norms in public health policy. Med Health Care Philos. 2018; 21(3):387–402. PMID: 29124449.

2. Kooli C. COVID-19: public health issues and ethical dilemmas. Ethics Med Public Health. 2021; 17:100635. PMID: 33553555.

3. Marckmann G, Schmidt H, Sofaer N, Strech D. Putting public health ethics into practice: a systematic framework. Front Public Health. 2015; 3:23. PMID: 25705615.

4. Rao R, Hawkins M, Ulrich T, Gatlin G, Mabry G, Mishra C. The evolving role of public health in medical education. Front Public Health. 2020; 8:251. PMID: 32714890.

5. Gaur PS, Gupta L. Social media for scholarly communication in central asia and its neighbouring countries. J Korean Med Sci. 2021; 36(4):e36. PMID: 33496088.

6. Sheikh A, Anderson M, Albala S, Casadei B, Franklin BD, Richards M, et al. Health information technology and digital innovation for national learning health and care systems. Lancet Digit Health. 2021; 3(6):e383–e396. PMID: 33967002.

7. Zimba O, Radchenko O, Strilchuk L. Social media for research, education and practice in rheumatology. Rheumatol Int. 2020; 40(2):183–190. PMID: 31863133.

8. Erdogan M, Aydin O, Seyahi E. Patients with rheumatic diseases are ready to use social media in clinical practice; what about rheumatologists? A cross-sectional survey. Rheumatol Int. 2022; 42(4):717–723. PMID: 34767066.

9. Koo BS, Kim D, Jun JB. Reliability and quality of Korean YouTube videos for education regarding gout. J Korean Med Sci. 2021; 36(45):e303. PMID: 34811977.

10. Kaplan K, Solak Y. Evaluation of YouTube videos on hepatocellular carcinoma. J Korean Med Sci. 2023; 38(7):e50. PMID: 36808545.

11. Gupta L, Gasparyan AY, Misra DP, Agarwal V, Zimba O, Yessirkepov M. Information and misinformation on COVID-19: a cross-sectional survey study. J Korean Med Sci. 2020; 35(27):e256. PMID: 32657090.

12. Kocyigit BF, Akaltun MS, Sahin AR. YouTube as a source of information on COVID-19 and rheumatic disease link. Clin Rheumatol. 2020; 39(7):2049–2054. PMID: 32447603.

13. Pamukcu M, Izci Duran T. Are YouTube videos enough to learn anakinra self-injection? Rheumatol Int. 2021; 41(12):2125–2131. PMID: 34559276.

14. Hutchison CM, Cave V, Walshaw EG, Burns B, Park C. YouTube^™ as a source for patient education about the management of dental avulsion injuries. Dent Traumatol. 2020; 36(2):207–211. PMID: 31606932.

15. Onder ME, Zengin O. YouTube as a source of information on gout: a quality analysis. Rheumatol Int. 2021; 41(7):1321–1328. PMID: 33646342.

16. Wang H, Yan C, Wu T, Zhang X, He J, Liu Z, et al. YouTube online videos as a source for patient education of cervical spondylosis-a reliability and quality analysis. BMC Public Health. 2023; 23(1):1831. PMID: 37730621.

17. Kocyigit BF, Akaltun MS. Does YouTube provide high quality information? Assessment of secukinumab videos. Rheumatol Int. 2019; 39(7):1263–1268. PMID: 31069444.

18. Kocyigit BF, Akyol A. YouTube as a source of information on COVID-19 vaccination in rheumatic diseases. Rheumatol Int. 2021; 41(12):2109–2115. PMID: 34562126.

19. Onder ME, Onder CE, Zengin O. Quality of English-language videos available on YouTube as a source of information on osteoporosis. Arch Osteoporos. 2022; 17(1):19. PMID: 35059873.

20. Tolu S, Yurdakul OV, Basaran B, Rezvani A. English-language videos on YouTube as a source of information on self-administer subcutaneous anti-tumour necrosis factor agent injections. Rheumatol Int. 2018; 38(7):1285–1292. PMID: 29761222.

21. Karakoyun A, Yildirim A. YouTube videos as a source of information concerning Behçet’s disease: a reliability and quality analysis. Rheumatol Int. 2021; 41(12):2117–2123. PMID: 34590188.

22. Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK. Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Informatics J. 2015; 21(3):173–194. PMID: 24670899.

23. Chan C, Sounderajah V, Daniels E, Acharya A, Clarke J, Yalamanchili S, et al. The reliability and quality of youtube videos as a source of public health information regarding COVID-19 vaccination: cross-sectional study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021; 7(7):e29942. PMID: 34081599.

24. Li HO, Bailey A, Huynh D, Chan J. YouTube as a source of information on COVID-19: a pandemic of misinformation? BMJ Glob Health. 2020; 5(5):e002604.

25. Kocyigit BF, Nacitarhan V, Koca TT, Berk E. YouTube as a source of patient information for ankylosing spondylitis exercises. Clin Rheumatol. 2019; 38(6):1747–1751. PMID: 30645752.

26. Yavuz MC, Buyuk SK, Genc E. Does YouTube™ offer high quality information? Evaluation of accelerated orthodontics videos. Ir J Med Sci. 2020; 189(2):505–509. PMID: 31650452.

27. Ozsoy-Unubol T, Alanbay-Yagci E. YouTube as a source of information on fibromyalgia. Int J Rheum Dis. 2021; 24(2):197–202. PMID: 33355406.

28. Celik H, Polat O, Ozcan C, Camur S, Kilinc BE, Uzun M. Assessment of the quality and reliability of the information on rotator cuff repair on YouTube. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2020; 106(1):31–34. PMID: 31882329.

29. Gasparyan AY, Yessirkepov M, Voronov AA, Gerasimov AN, Kostyukova EI, Kitas GD. Preserving the integrity of citations and references by all stakeholders of science communication. J Korean Med Sci. 2015; 30(11):1545–1552. PMID: 26538996.