Reliability and educational value of YouTube videos on penile prosthesis information
ADVANCES IN CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE, cilt.35, sa.3, ss.519-527, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 35 Sayı: 3
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.17219/acem/205521
- Dergi Adı: ADVANCES IN CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Directory of Open Access Journals
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.519-527
- Ankara Üniversitesi Adresli: Hayır
Özet
Background. In the contemporary era, acquiring online information has become a prevalent practice. As with any affliction, individuals are inclined to investigate the potential therapeutic avenues for erectile dysfunction (ED) on the internet. Objectives. To evaluate the quality, comprehensibility and informative content of YouTube videos on penile prosthesis implantation, with a focus on videos produced by healthcare professionals, and to address the videos according to the class of physician producing the video. Materials and methods. A search for "penile prosthesis" was conducted on YouTube using a censored network to ensure privacy and prevent bias. The first 100 relevant videos uploaded in the last decade were analyzed. They were categorized by source (academicians, government or private hospital physicians, and non-physicians) and assessed for quality using the modified Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information (DISCERN) scale, Global Quality Scale (GQS) and a newly developed Total Informative Score based on the European Association of Urology Patient Information Forms. The Kruskal-Wallis H test, Kendall's tau correlation test and Spearman's test were used for statistical analysis. Results. Of the videos analyzed, 87% provided informative content, with the majority (51%) uploaded by academic sources. The median duration time was 185 s (111-397). The average modified DISCERN score was low (median: 2, Q1-Q3: 2-3), indicating generally inadequate quality, with 54% rated as poor. No statistical significance occurred between GQS scores for the videos published by the upload source. Videos by government hospital physicians scored the highest in quality measures, while non-physician videos garnered more views and likes. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) understandability and actionability scores showed that videos from healthcare professionals had higher understandability (70%) than those from other sources. Conclusions. The overall quality ofYouTube videos on penile prostheses is low, despite most being informative. Videos created by physicians are more reliable and easierto understand. Implementing stricter guidelines for content creators and promoting public awareness initiatives are recommended to improve patient access to high-quality information.