Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Quality of information in Youtube videos on disorder of sexual development

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and quality of the videos published on YouTube on the subject of disorder of sexual development. The search was performed by using term ‘disorder of sexual development’, ‘differences in sex development’, ‘variations in sex development’ and ‘intersex’ on YouTube. Videos in languages other than English and whose sound or image quality was poor were excluded from the study. The videos were evaluated in terms of source, content, intended audience, commercial bias, and accuracy of information. Video features were recorded. Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) criteria, modified DISCERN scale and Global Quality Score (GQS) were used for quality evaluation. A total of 150 videos were evaluated. The source of 30% of the videos was medical education sites, the content of 43.3% was general information and the target audience of 40.6% was patients/society. Accuracy of information rate was 90% and commercial bias rate was 7.3%. The median JAMA, GQS and Modified DISCERN score were 1 (IQR value:2, range:0–2), 3 (IQR value:2, range:2–4) and 3 (IQR value:2, range:1–3) respectively. These scores were correlated with each other (rho = 0.834–0.909 p < 0.001). Scores of the videos whose source was academic journal/university were higher compared to other videos (p < 0.001). The median duration of the videos with good quality was longer (p < 0.001). A negative correlation was found between all scoring systems and number of views/likes/comments, view/comment per day and days since upload date (rho = −0.332, rho = −0.273, rho = −0.382, rho = −0.249, rho = −0.323 rho = −0.285 respectively; p < 0.05). YouTube is a good platform to learn about disorder of sexual development, but the quality may vary depending on the video source.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Laino L, Majore S, Preziosi N, Grammatico B, De Bernardo C, Scommegna S, et al. Disorders of sex development: a genetic study of patients in a multidisciplinary clinic. Endocr Connect. 2014;3:180–92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Monlleó IL, Zanotti SV, Araújo BPBD, Cavalcante Júnior EF, Pereira PD, Barros PMD, et al. Prevalence of genital abnormalities in neonates. J de Pediatr. 2012;88:489–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Crerand C, Kapa H, Litteral J, Nahata L, Combs B, Indyk J, et al. Parent perceptions of psychosocial care for children with differences of sex development. J Pediatr Urol. 2019;15:522.e1–e8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fast AM, Deibert CM, Hruby GW, Glassberg KI. Evaluating the quality of Internet health resources in pediatric urology. J Pediatr Urol. 2013;9:151–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Farnan JM, Paro JA, Higa J, Edelson J, Arora VM. The YouTube generation: implications for medical professionalism. Perspect Biol Med. 2008;51:517–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ozsoy‐Unubol T, Alanbay‐Yagci E. YouTube as a source of information on fibromyalgia. Int J Rheum Dis. 2021;24:197–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Selvi I, Baydilli N, Akinsal EC. Can YouTube English videos be recommended as an accurate source for learning about testicular self-examination? Urology. 2020;145:181–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cilio S, Collà Ruvolo C, Turco C, Creta M, Capece M, La Rocca R, et al. Analysis of quality information provided by “Dr. YouTubeTM” on phimosis. Int J Impot Res. 2023;35:398–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor—Let the reader and viewer beware. Jama. 1997;277:1244–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, Rose C, Leddin D, Van Zanten SV. A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. Off J Am Coll Gastroenterol| ACG. 2007;102:2070–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 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;53:105–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Canvasser NE, Ramo C, Morgan TM, Zheng K, Hollenbeck BK, Ghani KR. The use of social media in endourology: an analysis of the 2013 World Congress of Endourology meeting. J Endourol. 2015;29:615–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Duran MB, Kizilkan Y. Quality analysis of testicular cancer videos on YouTube. Andrologia. 2021;53:e14118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Adorisio O, Silveri M, Torino G. Evaluation of educational value of YouTube videos addressing robotic pyeloplasty in children. J Pediatr Urol. 2021;17:390.e1–e4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Toksoz A, Duran MB. Analysis of videos about vesicoureteral reflux on YouTube. J Pediatr Urol. 2021;17:858.e1–e6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bai G, Pan X, Zhao T, Chen X, Liu G, Fu W. Quality assessment of YouTube Videos as an information source for testicular torsion. Front Public Health. 2022;10:905609.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Salama A, Panoch J, Bandali E, Carroll A, Wiehe S, Downs S, et al. Consulting “Dr. YouTube”: an objective evaluation of hypospadias videos on a popular video-sharing website. J Pediatr Urol. 2020;16:70.e1–e9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Culha Y, Seyhan Ak E, Merder E, Ariman A, Culha MG. Analysis of the YouTube videos on pelvic floor muscle exercise training in terms of their reliability and quality. Int Urol Nephrol. 2021;53:1–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Onder ME, Zengin O. YouTube as a source of information on gout: a quality analysis. Rheumatol Int. 2021;41:1321–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Gas S, Zincir OO, Bozkurt AP. Are YouTube videos useful for patients interested in botulinum toxin for bruxism? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019;77:1776–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

ST and MVK: data collection and analysis; ST: paper writing; MVK: supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehmet Vehbi Kayra.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Toksoz, S., Kayra, M.V. Quality of information in Youtube videos on disorder of sexual development. Int J Impot Res (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-023-00800-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-023-00800-7

Search

Quick links