Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the quality of videos on YouTube related to MRI-TRUS prostate fusion biopsy.
Material and Methods: A YouTube search was made on March 16, 2022, for the videos related to “MRI-TRUS prostate fusion biopsy”. The first 70 videos were ranked during this study by choosing “relevance” as a criterion. Video content quality was evaluated using the internationally validated Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Score (JAMAS) and Global Quality Score (GQS). The researcher also developed MRI-TRUS Prostate Fusion Biopsy Scoring (MTPFBS) to evaluate videos’ technical content. The upload origin and length of video view count, like and dislike ratios, and video power indexes (VPI) were all evaluated.
Results: Video contents prepared by academic center sources had significantly higher GQS scores than scientific meetings or private institution videos. Video contents prepared by private institution sources had significantly lower MTPFBS and JAMA scores than other videos (p<0.05). According to the type of information, videos uploaded with voice and writing had significantly higher JAMAS and MTPFBS than voice alone (p<0.05). Length of videos showed a positive correlation with JAMA and MTPFBS. VPI and the number of likes showed a strong correlation. However, VPI or the number of likes did not correlate with GQS, JAMAS, and MTPFBS scores.
Conclusion: Evaluated on YouTube, the MRI-TRUS prostate fusion biopsy videos were of low quality. In that regard, videos prepared by the specialists and academic centers should be standardized to transfer better quality information. According to current data, it may not be recommended to watch these video contents.
Keywords: multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, prostate, internet
ABSTRACT
Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the quality of videos on YouTube related to MRI-TRUS prostate fusion biopsy.
Material and Methods: A YouTube search was made on March 16, 2022, for the videos related to “MRI-TRUS prostate fusion biopsy”. The first 70 videos were ranked during this study by choosing “relevance” as a criterion. Video content quality was evaluated using the internationally validated Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Score (JAMAS) and Global Quality Score (GQS). The researcher also developed MRI-TRUS Prostate Fusion Biopsy Scoring (MTPFBS) to evaluate videos’ technical content. The upload origin and length of video view count, like and dislike ratios, and video power indexes (VPI) were all evaluated.
Results: Video contents prepared by academic center sources had significantly higher GQS scores than scientific meetings or private institution videos. Video contents prepared by private institution sources had significantly lower MTPFBS and JAMA scores than other videos (p<0.05). According to the type of information, videos uploaded with voice and writing had significantly higher JAMAS and MTPFBS than voice alone (p<0.05). Length of videos showed a positive correlation with JAMA and MTPFBS. VPI and the number of likes showed a strong correlation. However, VPI or the number of likes did not correlate with GQS, JAMAS, and MTPFBS scores.
Conclusion: Evaluated on YouTube, the MRI-TRUS prostate fusion biopsy videos were of low quality. In that regard, videos prepared by the specialists and academic centers should be standardized to transfer better quality information. According to current data, it may not be recommended to watch these video contents.
Keywords: multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, prostate, internet