TY - JOUR
T1 - An Evaluation of the Readability and Content-Quality of Pelvic Organ Prolapse YouTube Transcripts
AU - Herbert, Amber S.
AU - Nemirovsky, Amy
AU - Hess, Deborah S.
AU - Walter, Dawn
AU - Abraham, Nitya E.
AU - Loeb, Stacy
AU - Malik, Rena D.
N1 - Funding Information:
Stacy Loeb M.D. is supported by Sanofi and equity in Gilead, outside the scope of this paper.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2021/8
Y1 - 2021/8
N2 - Objective: To evaluate the readability, quality, and accuracy of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) YouTube transcripts. Methods: We analyzed the readability of written transcripts for the first 100 YouTube videos about “Pelvic Organ Prolapse.” Transcripts were excluded if they lacked narration in English or contained both no text and no audio. Readability was evaluated using an online software (www.readabilityformulas.com) to determine reading grade levels. The quality of videos was scored using the DISCERN quality criteria and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool. Accuracy was assessed by comparing content to accepted POP treatment guidelines. Results: The median grade level of all 100 videos was 12.6. High quality transcripts or transcripts that discuss the benefits, risk, alternative treatments, and quality of life had a median readability score of 12.5. Transcripts with low misinformation (85%) had a higher median readability index (12.6), than transcripts containing high misinformation (12.2). More than 20% of transcripts discussed shared decision-making. The median readability index for videos with a high Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool score (>75%) for understandability and actionability were both 12.6. Conclusion: Transcripts of POP YouTube videos are written at difficult levels with many transcripts exceeding the reading capabilities of the American population. The majority of good transcripts or transcripts with high quality content, low misinformation, shared decision-making, no commercial bias, and understandable and actionable content were written at a high school level or above. Efforts should be made to avoid complex terms when creating patient focused content and helping patients navigate to content of appropriate literacy online.
AB - Objective: To evaluate the readability, quality, and accuracy of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) YouTube transcripts. Methods: We analyzed the readability of written transcripts for the first 100 YouTube videos about “Pelvic Organ Prolapse.” Transcripts were excluded if they lacked narration in English or contained both no text and no audio. Readability was evaluated using an online software (www.readabilityformulas.com) to determine reading grade levels. The quality of videos was scored using the DISCERN quality criteria and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool. Accuracy was assessed by comparing content to accepted POP treatment guidelines. Results: The median grade level of all 100 videos was 12.6. High quality transcripts or transcripts that discuss the benefits, risk, alternative treatments, and quality of life had a median readability score of 12.5. Transcripts with low misinformation (85%) had a higher median readability index (12.6), than transcripts containing high misinformation (12.2). More than 20% of transcripts discussed shared decision-making. The median readability index for videos with a high Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool score (>75%) for understandability and actionability were both 12.6. Conclusion: Transcripts of POP YouTube videos are written at difficult levels with many transcripts exceeding the reading capabilities of the American population. The majority of good transcripts or transcripts with high quality content, low misinformation, shared decision-making, no commercial bias, and understandable and actionable content were written at a high school level or above. Efforts should be made to avoid complex terms when creating patient focused content and helping patients navigate to content of appropriate literacy online.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85104571399&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85104571399&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.urology.2021.03.009
DO - 10.1016/j.urology.2021.03.009
M3 - Article
C2 - 33775787
AN - SCOPUS:85104571399
SN - 0090-4295
VL - 154
SP - 120
EP - 126
JO - Urology
JF - Urology
ER -