MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092393541 · doi:10.1177/0145561320962867

Evaluating YouTube as a Source of Patient Information for Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery

2020· article· en· W3092393541 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Wu, Daniel J. Lee, Allan Vescan, John M. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueEar Nose & Throat Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntraclass correlationChecklistFunctional endoscopic sinus surgeryMedicinePhysical therapySurgeryPsychologyClinical psychologySinusitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To evaluate the quality of information presented on YouTube regarding functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) for patients. Methods: YouTube was searched using FESS-specific keywords under the setting of “relevance.” The first 50 videos from each keyword were reviewed and analyzed by 2 independent physician reviewers. Videos not related to FESS and duplicates were excluded. Outcome measures included the modified DISCERN score (range 0-5), the Journal of the American Medical Association ( JAMA) benchmark criteria (range: 0-4), a novel scoring checklist for FESS assessing usefulness (range: 0-16), and the Video Power Index (VPI). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated. Results: Of the 200 videos identified, 95 videos were analyzed after exclusions. Videos had an average VPI of 40.8 and SD 133.2. Average scores from the 3 objective checklists among all videos were low: modified DISCERN: 1.91, SD: 1.15; JAMA benchmark: 1.91, SD: 0.76; and FESS score: 3.54, SD: 1.77. The ICC between the 2 independent reviewers was excellent for all 3 checklists. We noted significant positive Pearson correlation between all 3 checklist scores ( P < .001). In between-group comparisons of mean scores, there was significantly higher DISCERN and JAMA scores for videos from university/professional organizations, as compared to videos from medical advertising/for-profit companies and independent users. There were no significant differences in FESS scores noted between the 3 groups. Conclusion: There were overall low scores across the modified DISCERN, JAMA benchmark criteria, and FESS scoring checklists, reflecting the poor quality of YouTube videos as a source of patient information for FESS.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations45
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEar Nose & Throat JournalSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207