MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Descriptive and content analysis of breast cancer vlogs on YouTube.

2024· article· en· W4402986145 on OpenAlexaff
Nina Morena, Elly Htite, Yitzchok Ahisar, Victoria Hayman, Carrie A. Rentschler, Ari N. Meguerditchian

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Oncology Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media in Health Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContent analysisDescriptive statisticsContent (measure theory)Breast cancerSociologyCancerStatisticsMathematicsMedicineInternal medicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

258 Background: Vlogs, or “video blogs,” are personally-created experiential videos based on wide-ranging topics, usually posted to YouTube. Many women with breast cancer (BC) document their cancer experiences in YouTube vlogs. These may have the potential to serve as peer-to-peer support and provide community. This study provides a descriptive and content analysis of vlogs by women with BC. Methods: YouTube was searched in incognito mode in 11/2023 using the search terms “breast cancer vlog.” A maximum of 10 videos/creator were included based on viewership and date created.Video characteristics collected included: title, length, number of views, likes, comments, and playlist inclusion. Videos were assessed for sponsorship, presence of explanation and discussion on BC, type of content, and themes. Creator characteristics included age, location, and engagement approaches. Descriptive and content analysis were performed to assess and analyze video content and potential areas where peer-to-peer support may be provided. Results: 90 vlogs by 13 creators were included, all originating from personal accounts. Mean video length, number of views, and number of comments were 21.4 minutes (SD 9.1), 266,780 (SD 534,465), and 1485 (SD 3422), respectively. 38.9% included hashtags. 12.2% included paid sponsorships. Most common filming location was at home (96.7%), followed by the hospital (31.1%), or in the car (21.1%). Home vlogs were most often set in the living room (44.3%), bedroom (33.0%), or kitchen (20.6%). 56.7% included visuals of treatment as well as physical findings. Creators addressed motivation for vlogging in 48.9%; the two most common reasons were wanting to build a community and helping others in a similar situation. In 46.7%, creators explicitly expressed emotion. Most common themes were treatment (85.6%), mental health (81.1%), side effects (72.2%), appearance (63.3%), and family relationships (36.7%). Subthemes included young age, finances, and the importance of online community support. Patient-directed advice was offered in 60.0%, mostly on treatment-related issues. In 56.7%,creators provided explicit treatment definitions. Chemotherapy was discussed in 70.0%; surgery in 57.8%, primarily mastectomy; radiation in 30.0%; general side effects in 71.1%. 24.4% were about a new diagnosis. When mentioned (44.4%), most common creator location was the USA. When mentioned (30.0%), most common age demographic was 20-29 years old. Conclusions: Vlogs by women with BC receive significant levels of engagement. The dedication to building community demonstrated by vlog creators, and the personal nature of their storytelling, advice, and suggestions, may make these vlogs a potential resource for peer-to-peer support.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.459
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.296
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCO Oncology PracticeSame topicSocial Media in Health EducationFrench-language works237,207