ArticleCureus2022
Understandability and Actionability of Available Video Information on YouTube Regarding Hemophilia: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A cross-sectional quantitative analysis of the readability and quality of online resources regarding thumb carpometacarpal joint replacement surgery.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Quality, Readability, and Activity of Online Information on Brain Arteriovenous Malformations.Cureus · 2023Article
- Assessment of Understandability and Actionability of YouTube Videos on Hemolytic Disease of the Newborn.Cureus · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction With the advent of revolutionary information technology, most general medical information can be accessed by the community at large. However, the factual nature of information, its understandability, and actionability of diseases like Hemophilia are unknown to the general population. Hence the present study has been envisaged to assess the understandability and actionability of available video information on YouTube about Hemophilia. Methods A cross-sectional study was performed using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Audiovisual materials (PEMAT-AV) to assess the understandability and actionability of 50 videos shown by order of relevance utilizing three independent assessors. An online google survey was prepared using the PEMAT questionnaire as a basis and results were recorded and saved as a Microsoft Excel sheet for analysis. Data was analyzed using either Microsoft Excel or an online calculator as the case may be. Results A total of 50 short videos on Hemophilia were assessed by three independent assessors using PEMAT. The data so obtained was rechecked by an independent reviewer before data analysis. Three videos were excluded due to non-English language while only two videos out of 50 showed 100% average understandability and actionability. Average understandability and actionability scores range between 34 to 100 percent and 11.1 to 100 percent, respectively. Most videos have higher average understandability than actionability (P value=0.003). Conclusion Our study shows there are only a few high-quality short videos available as audio-visual patient education materials on YouTube about Hemophilia. There is a great need to develop content that is beneficial to patients as patient educational material.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.