Amaç: YouTubeTM platformunda bulunan ve ortognatik cerrahiyi konu alan Türkçe videoların bilgi içeriği kalitesi yönünden değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Google Trends uygulaması ile belirlenen 10 anahtar kelime ile tespit edilen ilk 60 video olmak üzere toplam 398 video incelenmiştir. Dâhil etme ve dışlama kriterleri doğrultusunda 77 video çalışmaya dâhil edilmiştir. Dâhil edilen her bir videonun izlenme sayısı, beğeni, beğenilmeme ve yorum sayısı, süresi, yüklenmeden itibaren geçen gün sayısı kaydedilmiştir. Bilgi içerikleri kalitesine göre 4 gruba (kötü, zayıf, iyi, mükemmel) ayrılmıştır. İstatistiksel analizlerde Shapiro-Wilks, Kruskal-Wallis, ki-kare, Dunn ve araştırmacılar arası korelasyon için Spearman korelasyon testi ve Cohen'in kappa indeksi kullanılmıştır. Anlamlılık düzeyi p<0,05 olarak belirlenmiştir. Bulgular: Yükleyici kaynağa göre 48 videonun doktorlar, 21 videonun diğer kaynaklar, 8 videonun hastalar tarafından yüklendiği görülmüştür. Hastaların yüklediği videoların izlenme oranı, yorum ve beğenilme sayılarının diğer kaynaklara göre anlamlı yüksek olduğu bulunmuştur (p=0,030, p=0,016, p=0,047). İncelen 77 videonun 46 (%59,74) tanesinin kötü, 23 (%29,88) tanesinin orta, 8 (%10,38) tanesinin iyi bilgi içeriğine sahip olduğu görülmüştür. Bilgi içeriği kalitesi ile yükleyici kaynak arasında anlamlı fark gözlenmemiştir (p=0,527). Sonuç: Ortognatik cerrahi konusunda Türkçe You- TubeTM videolarının bilgi içeriklerinin yetersiz olduğu görülmüştür. Uzmanlar ve ilgili kurumlar çevrim içi platformların bilgi içeriklerinin iyileştirilmesinde hastaların doğru bilgilendirilmesi için daha aktif rol almalıdır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: İnternet; video kayıt; ortognatik cerrahi; sosyal medya; sağlık
Objective: The current study aims to evaluate the Turkish videos on orthognathic surgery on the YouTubeTM platform regarding the quality of their information content. Material and Methods: A total of 398 videos, of which the first 60 videos were detected with the 10 keywords determined by the Google Trends application, were examined. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 77 videos were included in the study. The number of views, likes, dislikes, comments, duration, and the number of days since uploading were recorded for each video included. According to their quality, the information content was divided into 4 groups (bad, moderate, good, excellent). For statistical analysis, Shapiro-Wilks, Kruskal-Wallis, chi-square, Dunn, Spearman correlation test, and Cohen's kappa index were used for interresearch correlation. The significance level was determined as p<0.05. Results: According to uploaded sources, 48 videos were uploaded by doctors, 21 videos by other sources, and 8 videos by patients. The rate of watching, the number of comments, and the likes of the videos uploaded by the patients were found to be significantly higher than other sources (p=0.030, p=0.016, p=0.047). Of the 77 videos reviewed, 46 (59.74%) had bad information, 23 (29.88%) had moderate, 8 (10.38%) had good information content. No significant difference was observed between the quality of the information content and the uploader source (p=0.527). Conclusion: The information content of Turkish YouTubeTM videos on orthognathic surgery is insufficient. Clinicians and relevant institutions should take a more active role in improving the information content on online platforms to inform the patients accurately.
Keywords: Internet; video recording; orthognathic surgery; social media; health
- Finlay PM, Atkinson JM, Moos KF. Orthognathic surgery: patient expectations; psychological profile and satisfaction with outcome. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995;33(1):9-14. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- McLeod NM, Gruber EA. Consent for orthognathic surgery: a UK perspective. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;50(2):e17-21. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Cunningham SJ, Hunt NP, Feinmann C. Perceptions of outcome following orthognathic surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1996;34(3):210-3. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Ostler S, Kiyak HA. Treatment expectations versus outcomes among orthognathic surgery patients. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1991;6(4):247-55. [PubMed]
- Bailey LJ, Proffit WR, White R Jr. Assessment of patients for orthognathic surgery. Semin Orthod. 1999;5(4):209-22. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Stirling J, Latchford G, Morris DO, Kindelan J, Spencer RJ, Bekker HL. Elective orthognathic treatment decision making: a survey of patient reasons and experiences. J Orthod. 2007;34(2):113-27; discussion 111. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Aldairy T, Laverick S, McIntyre GT. Orthognathic surgery: is patient information on the Internet valid? Eur J Orthod. 2012;34(4):466-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Hegarty E, Campbell C, Grammatopoulos E, DiBiase AT, Sherriff M, Cobourne MT. YouTube? as an information resource for orthognathic surgery. J Orthod. 2017;44(2):90-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Atkinson NL, Saperstein SL, Pleis J. Using the internet for health-related activities: findings from a national probability sample. J Med Internet Res. 2009;20;11(1):e4. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Bavbek NC, Tuncer BB. Information on the internet regarding orthognathic surgery in Turkey: is it an adequate guide for potential patients? Turk J Orthod. 2017;30(3):78-83. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Shuyler KS, Knight KM. What are patients seeking when they turn to the Internet? Qualitative content analysis of questions asked by visitors to an orthopaedics Web site. J Med Internet Res. 2003;5(4):e24. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Giustini D. How Web 2.0 is changing medicine. BMJ. 2006;333(7582):1283-4. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Omnicare [Internet]. © 2022 Omnicore Agency [Cited: February 6, 2022]. YouTube by the Numbers: Stats, Demographics & Fun Facts. Available from: [Link]
- Basch CH, Hillyer GC, Meleo-Erwin ZC, Jaime C, Mohlman J, Basch CE. Preventive behaviors conveyed on YouTube to mitigate transmission of COVID-19: cross-sectional study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020;6(2):e18807. Erratum in: JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020;6(2):e19601. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Cassidy JT, Fitzgerald E, Cassidy ES, Cleary M, Byrne DP, Devitt BM, et al. YouTube provides poor information regarding anterior cruciate ligament injury and reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(3):840-5. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Hatipoğlu Ş, Gaş S. Is information for surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion available on YouTube reliable? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;78(6):1017.e1-1017.e10. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Desai T, Shariff A, Dhingra V, Minhas D, Eure M, Kats M. Is content really king? An objective analysis of the public's response to medical videos on YouTube. PLoS One. 2013;8(12):e82469. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Ayranci F, Buyuk SK, Kahveci K. Are YouTube? videos a reliable source of information about genioplasty? J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;122(1):39-42. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Hassona Y, Taimeh D, Marahleh A, Scully C. YouTube as a source of information on mouth (oral) cancer. Oral Dis. 2016;22(3):202-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Sorensen JA, Pusz MD, Brietzke SE. YouTube as an information source for pediatric adenotonsillectomy and ear tube surgery. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2014;78(1):65-70. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159-74. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kumar N, Pandey A, Venkatraman A, Garg N. Are video sharing web sites a useful source of information on hypertension? J Am Soc Hypertens. 2014;8(7):481-90. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Tanidir AN, Atac MS, Karacelebi E. Information given by multimedia: influence on anxiety about extraction of impacted wisdom teeth. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;54(6):652-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Laskin DM, Priest JH, Alfaqih S, Carrico CK. Does viewing a third molar informed consent video decrease patients' anxiety? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;76(12):2515-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kidy S, McGoldrick DM, Stockton P. YouTube? as a source of information on extraction of third molars. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;25(4):519-24. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis--a wakeup call? J Rheumatol. 2012;39(5):899-903. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Grewal J, Marria G, Goel S. Information content of youtube videos on orthognathic surgery-Helpful? Indian J Dent Sci. 2019;11(2):90-4. [Crossref]
- Delli K, Livas C, Vissink A, Spijkervet FK. Is YouTube useful as a source of information for Sjögren's syndrome? Oral Dis. 2016;22(3):196-201. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Özdal Zincir Ö, Bozkurt AP, Gaş S. Potential patient education of Youtube videos related to wisdom tooth surgical removal. J Craniofac Surg. 2019;30(5):e481-e4. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Gaş S, Zincir ÖÖ, Bozkurt AP. Are YouTube videos useful for patients interested in botulinum toxin for bruxism? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019;77(9):1776-83. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Wong K, Doong J, Trang T, Joo S, Chien AL. YouTube videos on botulinum toxin a for wrinkles: a useful resource for patient education. Dermatol Surg. 2017;43(12):1466-73. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- García-Rapp F. The digital media phenomenon of YouTube beauty gurus: the case of bubzbeauty. Int J Web Based Communities. 2016;12(4):360-75. [Crossref]
- Rosara NA, Luthfia A. Factors influencing consumer's purchase intention on beauty products in Youtube. J Distrib Sci. 2020;18(6):37-46. [Crossref]
- Castillo-Abdul B, Jaramillo-Dent D, Romero-Rodríguez LM. 'How to Botox' on YouTube: influence and beauty procedures in the era of user-generated content. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(8):4359. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK. Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Informatics J. 2015;21(3):173-94. [Crossref] [PubMed]
.: İşlem Listesi