Introduction
A large number of patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AH) seek information about their disease on the internet. The reliability, comprehensiveness, and quality of said information in Spanish has not been studied.
Aims & Methods
Our aim was to describe the characteristics of the information about AH on YouTube®. Methods: An analytic observational study evaluated videos in Spanish about AH available on YouTube®, describing their general characteristics, viewer engagement, and information sources. Standardized tools were utilized to analyze reliability (DISCERN), comprehensiveness, and overall quality (Global Quality Score [GQS]).
Results
One hundred videos were included, 93% of which provided information from healthcare professionals (group 1), and 7% of which reflected patient opinions (group 2). There were differences in the median reliability (DISCERN: 4 vs 2, P ≤ .05) and comprehensiveness (4 vs 2, P ≤ .05) scores between groups, but equal overall quality (GQS 3 vs 2, P = .2). Reliability (DISCERN: 4; IQR: 3-4) and comprehensiveness (4.5; IQR: 3-5) were higher in videos by professional organizations, compared with those by independent users, healthcare information websites, and for-profit organizations (DISCERN: 3; IQR: 2.5-3.5; P < .001). Reliability (DISCERN: 2; IQR: 1.5-3), comprehensiveness (2; IQR; 1.5-2.5), and quality (GQS: 2.5; IQR: 1.5-3.5) were lower for videos made by for-profit organizations.
Conclusion
The majority of videos about AH in Spanish on YouTube® have good reliability, comprehensiveness, and quality. Videos created by academic organizations had higher scores, thus their collaboration, with respect to patient opinion videos, is suggested.
References
1. Firth J, Torous J, Stubbs B, et al. The “online brain”: how the Internet may be changing our cognition. World Psychiatry 2019;18:119–29. doi: 10.1002/wps.20617.
2. Auxier B, Anderson M. Social Media Use in 2021 [Internet]. Pew Research Center 2021 [cited 2021 Apr 9]. Available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/04/07/social-media-use-in-2021/
3. Pew Research Center. The diagnosis difference [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2022 Feb 26]. Available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2013/11/26/the-diagnosis-difference/
4. Tang PC, Newcomb C. Informing patients: a guide for providing patient health information. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1998;5:563–70. doi: 10.1136/jamia.1998.0050563.
5. Smailhodzic E, Hooijsma W, Boonstra A, et al. Social media use in healthcare: A systematic review of effects on patients and on their relationship with healthcare professionals. BMC Health Serv Res 2016;16:1–14. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1691-0.
6. Lui C-W, Wang Z, Wang N, et al. A call for better understanding of social media in surveillance and management of noncommunicable diseases. Health Res Policy Syst 2021;19:18. doi: 10.1186/s12961-021-00683-4.
7. Hill JA, Agewall S, Baranchuk A, et al. Medical misinformation. Circulation 2019 ;139:571–2. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.039193.
8. Mieli-Vergani G, Vergani D, Czaja AJ, et al. Autoimmune hepatitis. Nat Rev Dis Prim 2018;4:18017. doi: 10.1038/nrdp.2018.17.
Disclosure
Article IN PRESS in Revista de Gastroenterología de México