The assessment of online health videos for surgery in Crohn's disease

Evaluating YouTube as a Source of Education for Patients Undergoing Surgery: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review is to characterize the peer-reviewed literature investigating YouTube as a source of patient education for patients undergoing surgery.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

YouTube is the largest online video sharing platform and has become a substantial source of health information that patients are likely to access before surgery, yet there has been no systematic assessment of peer-reviewed studies. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Ovid HealthStar from inception through to December of 2021.

METHODS

All primary studies evaluating YouTube as a source of patient education relating to surgical procedures (general, cardiac, urology, otolaryngology, plastic, vascular) were included. Study screening and data extraction occurred in duplicate with two reviewers. Characteristics extracted included video length, view count, upload source, overall video educational quality, and quality of individual studies.

RESULTS

Among 6,453 citations, 56 studies were identified that examined 6,797 videos with 547 hours of content and 1.39 billion views. There were 49 studies that evaluated the educational quality of the videos. A total of 43 quality assessment tools were used, with each study using a mean of 1.90 assessment tools. Per the global rating for assessments, 34/49 studies (69%) concluded that the overall quality of educational content was poor.

CONCLUSIONS

While the impact of non-peer-reviewed YouTube videos on patient knowledge for surgery is unclear, the large amount of online content suggests that they are in demand. The overall educational content of these videos is poor, however, and there is substantial heterogeneity in the quality assessment tools used in their evaluation. A peer-reviewed and standardized approach to online education with video content is needed to better support patients.

The Use of Narrative in Science and Health Communication: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Many people deny science and reject health recommendations despite widely distributed facts and statistics. Didactic science and health communication is often dry, and relies on the false assumption that people make purely evidence-based decisions. Stories can be a powerful teaching tool by capturing attention and evoking emotion.

OBJECTIVE

We explore the impact and appeal of, and describe best practices for, using narrative (storytelling) versus didactic methods in science and health communication.

PATIENT INVOLVEMENT

No patients were involved in the review process.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Web of Science for articles either: assessing effectiveness of narrative science/health communication; assessing acceptability of (or preference for) narrative science/health communication; giving advice on how best to use narrative; and/or providing science-based explanations for how/why narrative succeeds.

RESULTS

Narrative science/health communication is effective and appealing for audiences across a variety of topics and mediums, with supporting evidence across fields such as epidemiology, neuroscience, and psychology. Whether narrative or didactic messaging is most effective depends on the topic, audience, and objective, as well as message quality. However, combining narrative with didactic methods is likely to be more effective than using either strategy alone.

DISCUSSION

Narrative science/health communication merits wider implementation and further research. Narrative communication creates openness to information by delaying the formulation of counterarguments.

PRACTICAL VALUE

Science and health communicators should collaborate with cultural and storytelling experts, work directly with their target audiences throughout the message development and testing processes, and rely on popular story elements (e.g., first-person point of view, relatable protagonists) to improve the comprehension, engagement, and thoughtful consideration of their intended audience.

FUNDING

This work was funded by Thirty Meter Telescope, with which two authors (GKS and SD) were affiliated. Otherwise, the funding organization had no role in the study and/or submission.

Evaluation of online content on proctological disorders in Portuguese language

Introduction Health literacy assumes an increasing relevance as the disseminated access to online contents may impact community health. This study aims to evaluate the suitability of online content on benign proctological disorders. Methods The platforms Google© and YouTube™ were searched using the keywords hemorrhoidal disease, anal fistula, anal fissure, anal pruritus, and fecal incontinence. Each page was analyzed for: interactivity, credibility, readability, and content adequacy. For each video the content, reactions, and comments of the users were analyzed. Three validated scales were applied - Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG); Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM), and quality criteria for consumer health information on treatment choices (DISCERN). Results A total of 127 webpages and 113 videos were evaluated. Forty webpages (31.50%) included images and 10 (37.04%) had informative videos. The SMOG scale presented an average value of 9.91±0.94 which estimates the need of 10 years of schooling for comprehension and 64 webpages (52.07%) presented a reading level higher than the recommended B1. The mean SAM score was 39.46±11.2% and the DISCERN scale averaged 40.33±5.69, corresponding to a reasonable content. Only 20 pages (15.75%) included interactivity tools and 44 (34.64%) contained bibliographic references. The videos posted by patients (n=67, 59.2%) had the highest number of views and positive comments whereas health professionals' videos (n=21; 18.75%) had the highest proportion of requests for additional information. Discussion Online content regarding benign proctological disorders is globally inappropriate for the health literacy level of the Portuguese population, at the writing and reading levels.

Survey to define informational needs of patients undergoing surgery for Crohn's anal fistula

AIM

There are many surgical treatments used in Crohn's anal fistula, although none is perfect. Decisions about surgery in this condition may be preference sensitive. The aim of this study was to identify what information patients would like in order to make treatment decisions and to explore experiences of making decisions in this setting.

METHOD

A survey was designed based upon qualitative interviews and input from patients and clinicians. It included a long list of informational items to be ranked on a scale of importance, a control preference scale, the decision regret scale, and items exploring preferred information formats. This was distributed through 10 English hospitals to patients with recent surgical treatment for Crohn's anal fistula. Results were analysed using principal component analysis, to identify key informational needs, and other appropriate descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

In total 92 questionnaires were returned (response rate 41.8%); 48 (52.5%) respondents were women and 54 (58.7%) had undergone seton insertion. Principal component analysis identified three information needs: wound and aftercare, effect on perianal symptoms, severity of surgery. Decision-making preferences showed a desire to participate in decision-making. Median decision regret score was 25/100 (i.e., low). The preferred format for sharing information to support decision-making was from the surgeon, 80/92 (87.0%), and from a booklet, 58/92 (63.0%).

CONCLUSION

Key informational needs in this condition are wound and after care, effect on perianal symptoms, and severity of surgery. Patients would like this information to help engage in shared decision-making.

A systematic qualitative case study: questions, data collection, NVivo analysis and saturation

Purpose

The study aims to explore the case study method with the formation of questions, data collection procedures and analysis, followed by how and on which position the saturation is achieved in developing a centralized Shariah governance framework for Islamic banks in Bangladesh.

Design/methodology/approach

Using purposive and snowball sampling procedures, data have been collected from 17 respondents who are working in the central bank and Islamic banks of Bangladesh through face-to-face and semi-structured interviews.

Findings

The study claims that researchers can form the research questions by using “what” question mark in qualitative research. Besides, the qualitative research and case study could explore the answers of “what” questions along with the “why” and “how” more broadly, descriptively and extensively about a phenomenon. Similarly, saturation can be considered attaining the ultimate point of data collection by the researchers without adding anything in the databank. Overall, this study proposes three stages of saturation: First, information redundancy. Second, referring the respondents (already considered in the study) without knowing anything about the data collection and their responses. Third, through the NVivo open coding process due to the decrease of reference or quotes in a certain position or in the saturation position as a result of fewer outcomes or insufficient information. The saturation is thus achieved in the diversified positions, i.e. three respondents for regulatory, nine for Shariah scholars and officers and five for the experts concerning the responses and respondents.

Research limitations/implications

The study has potential implications on the qualitative research method, including the case study, saturation process and points, NVivo analysis and qualitative questions formation.

Originality/value

This research defines a case study with the inclusion of “what” and illustrates the saturation process in diverse positions. The qualitative research questions can also be formed with “what” in addition “why” and “how”.

YouTube Videos as a Source of Information on Colorectal Cancer: What Do Our Patients Learn?

YouTube is the second most visited website in the world. No studies to date have characterized and evaluated YouTube videos on colorectal cancer (CRC) although these videos could influence patient decision-making, notably regarding screening and prevention. This study aims to report the characteristics and quality of these videos as patient education resources for CRC. YouTube's search engine was queried with different search phrases relating to CRC. The first two pages of each search result were analyzed. Two specialists devised a critical appraisal tool with a list of criteria to assess the videos. Quantitative YouTube parameter analyses and criteria assessment were performed. Inter-rater agreement was assessed between three raters. A total of 46 videos were eligible to be included in the study. The videos were on average 4:51 ± 3:27 min long. The videos had 10 times as many likes as dislikes. Less than half the videos discussed risk factors and protective factors. Only 41% of videos mentioned screening tests and only about a quarter discussed them. Palliative care was only mentioned in 2% of videos. A single video could obtain a perfect score on the critical appraisal tool. Length was the unique parameter associated with a high score on the criteria list. There is thus a need for more authoritative and comprehensive videos easily identifiable by the patients. Video popularity is not associated with comprehensiveness. Currently, YouTube might not be an education resource for CRC suited to every patient.