Quality, reliability, and content of YouTube videos in Portuguese language about dental trauma
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the quality, reliability and content of YouTube videos in Portuguese about dental trauma. Method: An infodemiological study was developed in which the first 60 videos found on YouTube with the terms “dental traumatism”, “dental trauma” and “broken tooth” were analyzed. Repeated videos, longer than one hour, in a language other than Portuguese, not intended for the lay public, resolution of questions, songs, interviews, shorts, and other subjects were excluded. The content of the videos was rated using a 23-point scale that classified them into low, moderate, and high content. Reliability was assessed using the modified DISCERN scale and the overall quality was assessed using the Global Quality Score (GQS) scale. The numbers of likes, dislikes, comments and engagement were also accounted. Data were analyzed by Mann-Whitney and Spearman’s correlation test (α= 5%). Result: A total of 55 videos were included in the study. Most were posted by healthcare professionals (92.7%) and just over half (63.7%) were of good overall quality. There were moderate, positive, and statistically significant correlations between DISCERN and GQS scores (r=0.454), duration (r=0.575), and trauma content (r=0.510). Overall quality correlated moderately, positively, and significantly with content scores (r=0.604) and video length (r=0.467). Conclusion: A significant proportion of Portuguese videos on YouTube about dental trauma had low content, quality and reliability information.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors maintain copyright and grant the HSJ the right to first publication. From 2024, the publications wiil be licensed under Attribution 4.0 International 
, allowing their sharing, recognizing the authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are authorized to assume additional contracts separately for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g., publishing in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their personal page) at any point after the editorial process.
Also, the AUTHOR is informed and consents that the HSJ can incorporate his article into existing or future scientific databases and indexers, under the conditions defined by the latter at all times, which will involve, at least, the possibility that the holders of these databases can perform the following actions on the article.
References
2. Levin L, Day PF, Hicks L, O’Connell A, Fouad AF, Bourguignon C, et al. International Association of Dental Traumatology guidelines for the management of traumatic dental injuries: general introduction. Dent Traumatol. 2020;36(4):309-13. http://doi.org/10.1111/edt.12574. PMid:32472740.
3. Vieira WA, Pecorari VGA, Figueiredo-de-Almeida R, Carvas N Jr, Vargas-Neto J, Santos ECA, et al. Prevalence of dental trauma in Brazilian children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cad Saude Publica. 2021;37(12):e00015920. http://doi.org/10.1590/0102-311x00015920. PMid:34909926.
4. Internet World Stats [Internet]. Bogota: Miniwatts Marketing Group; 2023 [cited 2023 Aug 10]. Available from: https://www. internetworldstats.com/
5. Bora K, Das D, Barman B, Borah P. Are Internet videos useful sources of information during global public health emergencies? A case study of YouTube videos during the 2015-16 Zika virus pandemic. Pathog Glob Health. 2018;112(6):320-8. http://doi. org/10.1080/20477724.2018.1507784. PMid:30156974.
6. Farnood A, Johnston B, Mair FS. A mixed methods systematic review of the effects of patient online self-diagnosing in the ‘smart-phone society’ on the healthcare professional-patient relationship and medical authority. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020;20(1):253. http://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-01243-6. PMid:33023577.
7. Li M, Yan S, Yang D, Li B, Cui W. YouTube™ as a source of information on food poisoning. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):952. http://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7297-9. PMid:31311523.
8. Hawryluk NM, Stompór M, Joniec EZ. Concerns of quality and reliability of educational videos focused on frailty syndrome on YouTube platform. Geriatrics. 2021;7(1):3. http://doi. org/10.3390/geriatrics7010003. PMid:35076501.
9. Ozsoy-Unubol T, Alanbay-Yagci E. YouTube as a source of information on fibromyalgia. Int J Rheum Dis. 2021;24(2):197- 202. http://doi.org/10.1111/1756-185X.14043. PMid:33355406.
10. Korkmaz YN, Buyuk SK. YouTube as a Patient-Information Source for Cleft Lip and Palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2020;57(3):327- 32. http://doi.org/10.1177/1055665619866349. PMid:31362515.
11. 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):207-11. http://doi.org/10.1111/edt.12517. PMid:31606932.
12. Ramadhani A, Zettira Z, Rachmawati YL, Hariyani N, Maharani DA. Quality and reliability of halitosis videos on YouTube as a source of information. Dent J. 2021;9(10):120. http://doi. org/10.3390/dj9100120. PMid:34677182.
13. Tozar KN, Yapıcı Yavuz G. Reliability of information on YouTube™ regarding pediatric dental trauma. Dent Traumatol. 2021;37(6):772- 8. http://doi.org/10.1111/edt.12708. PMid:34289239.
14. Google Trends [Internet]. Mountain View: Google Inc.; 2024 [cited 2024 Feb 15]. Available from: https://trends.google.com. br/trends/?geo=BR
15. Kılınç DD, Sayar G. Assessment of reliability of YouTube videos on orthodontics. Turk J Orthod. 2019;32(3):145-50. http://doi. org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2019.18064. PMid:31565689.
16. Bulman JS, Osborn JF. Measuring diagnostic consistency. Br Dent J. 1989;166(10):377-81. http://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4806849. PMid:2736171.
17. Souza AC, Alexandre NMC, Guirardello EB. Psychometric properties in instruments evaluation of reliability and validity. Epidemiol Serv Saude. 2017;26(3):649-59. http://doi. org/10.5123/S1679-49742017000300022. PMid:28977189.
18. Logullo P, Torloni MR, Latorraca COC, Riera R. The Brazilian Portuguese version of the DISCERN instrument: translation procedures and psychometric properties. Value Health Reg Issues. 2019;20:172-9. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.vhri.2019.09.001. PMid:31622803.
19. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999;53(2):105-11. http://doi.org/10.1136/jech.53.2.105. PMid:10396471.
20. Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, Rose C, Leddin D, Veldhuyzen van Zanten S. A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102(9):2070-7. http://doi. org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01325.x. PMid:17511753.
21. Day PF, Flores MT, O’Connell AC, Abbott PV, Tsilingaridis G, Fouad AF, et al. International Association of Dental Traumatology guidelines for the management of traumatic dental injuries: 3. Injuries in the primary dentition. Dent Traumatol. 2020;36(4):343-59. http://doi.org/10.1111/edt.12576. PMid:32458553.
22. Pons-Fuster E, Ruiz Roca J, Tvarijonaviciute A, López-Jornet P. YouTube information about diabetes and oral healthcare. Odontology. 2020;108(1):84-90. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10266- 019-00445-3. PMid:31396751.
23. Leong AY, Sanghera R, Jhajj J, Desai N, Jammu BS, Makowsky MJ. Is YouTube useful as a source of health information for adults with type 2 diabetes? A South Asian perspective. Can J Diabetes. 2018;42(4):395-403.e4. http://doi.org/10.1016/j. jcjd.2017.10.056. PMid:29282200.
24. Fernandez-Llatas C, Traver V, Borras-Morell JE, Martinez- Millana A, Karlsen R. Are health videos from hospitals, health organizations, and active users available to health consumers? An analysis of diabetes health video ranking in YouTube. Comput Math Methods Med. 2017;2017:8194940. http://doi. org/10.1155/2017/8194940. PMid:28243314.
25. Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis--a wakeup call? J Rheumatol. 2012;39(5):899-903. http://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.111114. PMid:22467934.
26. Forbes. Brasil é o terceiro país com mais usuários do YouTube em 2023 [Internet]. São Paulo: Forbes Group; 2023 [cited 2023 Sep 5]. Available from: https://forbes.com.br/forbes-tech/2023/05/brasil-e-o-terceiro-pais-com-mais-usuarios-do-youtube-em-2023/#:~:text=n%C3%A3o%20%C3%A9%20baixa.-,De%20 acordo%20com%20o%20banco%20internacional%20de%20 dados%20Statista%2C%20atualmente,no%20primeiro%20 m%C3%AAs%20do%20ano
27. Vos T, Allen C, Arora M, Barber RM, Bhutta ZA, Brown A, et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 310 diseases and injuries, 1990-2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet. 2016;388(10053):1545-602. http://doi.org/10.1016/ S0140-6736(16)31678-6. PMid:27733282.
28. Kim A, Moravec PL, Dennis AR. Combating fake news on social media with source ratings: the effects of user and expert reputation ratings. J Manage Inf Syst. 2019;36(3):931-68. http://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2019.1628921.
29. Garrett R, Poulsen S. Flagging Facebook falsehoods: self identified humor warnings outperform fact checker and peer warnings. J Comput Mediat Commun. 2019;24(5):240-58. http://doi. org/10.1093/jcmc/zmz012.
30. YouTube. Informações sobre conteúdos relacionados à saúde [Internet]. Mountain View: Google Inc.; 2024 [cited 2024 Feb 15]. Available from: https://support.google.com/youtube/ans wer/9795167?sjid=8543761559199999074-SA