Does YouTube TM Offer High-Quality Information About Nasoalveolar Molding?

Can Arslan · Elif Ceren Aksahin · R. Burcu Nur Yılmaz · Derya Germeç Çakan

12 citations0/0 files storedThe Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Social Media in Health Education Health Literacy and Information Accessibility Cleft Lip and Palate Research

Abstract

Objective To assess the content and quality of YouTube TM videos concerning nasoalveolar molding (NAM). Design YouTube TM was searched for videos containing information relevant to NAM with the 2 keywords “nasoalveolar molding,” and “presurgical infant orthopedics.” A total of 24 out of 51 videos were found to be applicable to this study and rated for quality using the Global Quality Scale (GQS). To determine whether the contents of the selected 24 videos were useful or not, a content usefulness index consisting of 8 parameters was created. The videos were classified according to the usefulness index as low or high content videos. Spearman rank correlation analysis, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Shapiro-Wilk, and Mann-Whitney U-tests were used for statistical analysis. Results The mean GQS score of the 24 YouTube TM videos on NAM was 2.3 ± 0.8, indicating overall poor quality. In terms of information, videos with high content (29.2%) were less in number than low content videos (70.8%). GQS values were found to be significantly higher in the high content group ( P < .01). Regarding the source, video, and audio quality values were significantly higher in the expert group compared to the caregiver group ( P < .01), whereas the usefulness index did not differ between groups ( P > .05). A significant relationship was found between GQS and usefulness index, audio quality, and video quality ( P < .001). Conclusions YouTube™ videos on NAM were generally inadequate in their content information and poor in quality. Expert videos, showing better audiovisual quality and flow compared to non-expert videos, did not offer higher quality information about NAM considering the usefulness index.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

References

2012YouTube for Information on Rheumatoid Arthritis — A Wakeup Call?2017Lingual orthodontic treatment: A YouTube™ video analysis 2017YouTube™ as an information resource for orthognathic surgery 2013YouTube as an information source for pediatric adenotonsillectomy and ear tube surgery 2015Effect of social media in improving knowledge among patients having fixed appliance orthodontic treatment: A single-center randomized controlled trial 2020YouTube as a source of information about orthodontic clear aligners 2011Informational value and bias of videos related to orthodontics screened on a video-sharing Web site 2019Assessment of Reliability of YouTube Videos on Orthodontics

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.