MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081958890 · doi:10.2196/ijmr.2669

Effectiveness of YouTube as a Source of Medical Information on Heart Transplantation

2013· article· en· W2081958890 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Heming Chen, Zhongkai Hu, Xiaolin Zheng, Zhaoshun Yuan, Zhaobin Xu, Ling‐Qing Yuan, Vinicio A. de Jesús Pérez, Ke Yuan, Mark Orcholski, Xiao‐Bo Liao

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsUploadMedicineTransplantationAudience measurementHeart transplantationThe InternetInternal medicineComputer scienceWorld Wide WebAdvertising

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In this digital era, there is a growing tendency to use the popular Internet site YouTube as a new electronic-learning (e-learning) means for continuing medical education. Heart transplantation (HTx) remains the most viable option for patients with end-stage heart failure or severe coronary artery disease. There are plenty of freely accessible YouTube videos providing medical information about HTx. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study is to determine the effectiveness of YouTube as an e-learning source on HTx. METHODS: In order to carry out this study, YouTube was searched for videos uploaded containing surgical-related information using the four keywords: (1) "heart transplantation", (2) "cardiac transplantation", (3) "heart transplantation operation", and (4) "cardiac transplantation operation". Only videos in English (with comments or subtitles in English language) were included. Two experienced cardiac surgeons watched each video (N=1800) and classified them as useful, misleading, or recipients videos based on the HTx-relevant information. The kappa statistic was used to measure interobserver variability. Data was analyzed according to six types of YouTube characteristics including "total viewership", "duration", "source", "days since upload", "scores" given by the viewers, and specialized information contents of the videos. RESULTS: A total of 342/1800 (19.00%) videos had relevant information about HTx. Of these 342 videos, 215 (62.8%) videos had useful information about specialized knowledge, 7/342 (2.0%) were found to be misleading, and 120/342 (35.1%) only concerned recipients' individual issues. Useful videos had 56.09% of total viewership share (2,175,845/3,878,890), whereas misleading had 35.47% (1,375,673/3,878,890). Independent user channel videos accounted for a smaller proportion (19% in total numbers) but might have a wider impact on Web viewers, with the highest mean views/day (mean 39, SD 107) among four kinds of channels to distribute HTx-related information. CONCLUSIONS: YouTube videos on HTx benefit medical professionals by providing a substantial amount of information. However, it is a time-consuming course to find high-quality videos. More authoritative videos by trusted sources should be posted for dissemination of reliable information. With an improvement of ranking system and content providers in future, YouTube, as a freely accessible outlet, will help to meet the huge informational needs of medical staffs and promote medical education on HTx.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.568
Teacher spread0.489 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207