Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the quality of information content in YouTube videos related to brain death. Methods: A search was conducted on the YouTube video platform using the keywords “brain death” and “brain death and organ donation” on November 20, 2024. A total of 42 videos were included in the evaluation. Data regarding the number of views, likes, comments, video duration, the number of days since the video was uploaded, and the source of the video were recorded. To classify the quality of the video content, DISCERN (Quality Criteria for Consumer Health), GQS (Global Quality Scale) for evaluating educational content, JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) for assessing the accuracy of the video source, and USEFULNESS for determining the utility of the videos were used. Results: Among the analyzed videos, 25 (59.52%) were uploaded by physicians. Sixteen videos (38.10%) were rated as having very low educational quality, 13 (30.95%) provided partially sufficient information about the video source, 16 (38.10%) were of low information quality, and 13 (30.95%) were found to be of low usefulness. The quality scores of videos uploaded by physicians were significantly higher compared to other groups. Discussion and Conclusion: The quality and educational value of YouTube videos related to brain death are low. Therefore, it is crucial that videos accessed through YouTube and other social media platforms are supervised by experts in the field to ensure accurate and useful information.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Karataş et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/68c192579b7b07f3a0616caa — DOI: https://doi.org/10.63729/tjic.2025.664
Sevim Şenol Karataş
Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi
Sait Fatih Öner
Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi
Oğuz Kağan Bulut
Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi
Türk yoğun bakım derneği dergisi/Türk yoğun bakım dergisi
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: