Medical Misinformation and Quality of Public Video Content on Cannabis for Chronic Pain Management: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the YouTube Platform.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Pain Research Pub Date : 2024-11-06 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JPR.S479200
Bright Etumuse, Majesty Greer, Jane Onyemachi, Youshaa El-Abed, Sai Kamma, Jay D Shah, Henry Tuan Tran, Nasir Hussain, Thomas P Pittelkow, Ryan S D'Souza
{"title":"Medical Misinformation and Quality of Public Video Content on Cannabis for Chronic Pain Management: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the YouTube Platform.","authors":"Bright Etumuse, Majesty Greer, Jane Onyemachi, Youshaa El-Abed, Sai Kamma, Jay D Shah, Henry Tuan Tran, Nasir Hussain, Thomas P Pittelkow, Ryan S D'Souza","doi":"10.2147/JPR.S479200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As cannabis legalization expands nationally and globally, its use for chronic pain increases, prompting people to seek information on social media platforms like YouTube. This study evaluates the accuracy and quality of information of popular YouTube videos on cannabis for chronic pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using search terms related to cannabis for pain, the top 66 videos by view count were selected. Each video was classified as useful, misleading, or neither. The quality and reliability of each video were assessed using the modified DISCERN, mDISCERN, score and the Global Quality Scale, GQS. The video characteristics, usefulness classification, mDISCERN scores, and GQS scores were summarized. Continuous and categorical outcomes were compared using <i>t</i>-test and chi-square, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 66 videos, 22.73% (n=15) were classified as useful, and 77.27% (n=51) were classified as neither. Of useful videos, 40.00% (n=6) were uploaded by physicians, 40.00% (n=6) were uploaded by corporations, and 6.67% (n=1) were uploaded by an independent user. Of videos classified as neither useful nor misleading, news sources uploaded 27.45% (n=14) of these videos (P=0.02). Physicians uploaded 37.50% (n = 18) of videos with a GQS score ≥3 (P=0.04), while independent users uploaded significantly more videos with a mDISCERN score <3 (22.20%, P=0.02). Useful videos had a mean GQS of 4.00 ± 0.65 compared to a mean GQS of 2.76 ± 0.86 for videos deemed neither (P<0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study suggests a moderate quality of YouTube content on cannabis use for chronic pain. Given cannabis's growing popularity and potential for misinformation on popular social media platforms, healthcare professionals and organizations should consider uploading educational videos on this topic on YouTube.</p>","PeriodicalId":16661,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain Research","volume":"17 ","pages":"3577-3586"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11550692/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S479200","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: As cannabis legalization expands nationally and globally, its use for chronic pain increases, prompting people to seek information on social media platforms like YouTube. This study evaluates the accuracy and quality of information of popular YouTube videos on cannabis for chronic pain.

Methods: Using search terms related to cannabis for pain, the top 66 videos by view count were selected. Each video was classified as useful, misleading, or neither. The quality and reliability of each video were assessed using the modified DISCERN, mDISCERN, score and the Global Quality Scale, GQS. The video characteristics, usefulness classification, mDISCERN scores, and GQS scores were summarized. Continuous and categorical outcomes were compared using t-test and chi-square, respectively.

Results: Of the 66 videos, 22.73% (n=15) were classified as useful, and 77.27% (n=51) were classified as neither. Of useful videos, 40.00% (n=6) were uploaded by physicians, 40.00% (n=6) were uploaded by corporations, and 6.67% (n=1) were uploaded by an independent user. Of videos classified as neither useful nor misleading, news sources uploaded 27.45% (n=14) of these videos (P=0.02). Physicians uploaded 37.50% (n = 18) of videos with a GQS score ≥3 (P=0.04), while independent users uploaded significantly more videos with a mDISCERN score <3 (22.20%, P=0.02). Useful videos had a mean GQS of 4.00 ± 0.65 compared to a mean GQS of 2.76 ± 0.86 for videos deemed neither (P<0.0001).

Conclusion: This study suggests a moderate quality of YouTube content on cannabis use for chronic pain. Given cannabis's growing popularity and potential for misinformation on popular social media platforms, healthcare professionals and organizations should consider uploading educational videos on this topic on YouTube.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于大麻治疗慢性疼痛的医疗误导和公共视频内容质量:对 YouTube 平台的横断面分析。
背景:随着大麻合法化在国内和全球的推广,大麻用于治疗慢性疼痛的情况越来越多,促使人们在 YouTube 等社交媒体平台上寻求相关信息。本研究评估了 YouTube 上有关大麻治疗慢性疼痛的热门视频信息的准确性和质量:方法:使用与治疗疼痛的大麻相关的搜索词,选出浏览量最高的 66 个视频。每个视频被分为有用、误导或两者皆无。使用修改后的 DISCERN(mDISCERN)评分和全球质量量表(GQS)评估每个视频的质量和可靠性。对视频特征、有用性分类、mDISCERN 分数和 GQS 分数进行总结。连续结果和分类结果分别采用 t 检验和卡方检验进行比较:在 66 个视频中,22.73%(n=15)被归类为有用,77.27%(n=51)被归类为无用。在有用的视频中,40.00%(n=6)由医生上传,40.00%(n=6)由公司上传,6.67%(n=1)由独立用户上传。在被归类为既无用处也无误导性的视频中,新闻来源上传的视频占 27.45%(n=14)(P=0.02)。在 GQS 得分≥3 的视频中,医生上传了 37.50%(n=18)(P=0.04),而独立用户上传的 mDISCERN 得分的视频明显更多:本研究表明,YouTube 上有关使用大麻治疗慢性疼痛的内容质量适中。鉴于大麻在流行的社交媒体平台上越来越受欢迎,而且有可能出现错误信息,医疗保健专业人员和机构应考虑在 YouTube 上上传有关这一主题的教育视频。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pain Research
Journal of Pain Research CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
411
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Pain Research is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that welcomes laboratory and clinical findings in the fields of pain research and the prevention and management of pain. Original research, reviews, symposium reports, hypothesis formation and commentaries are all considered for publication. Additionally, the journal now welcomes the submission of pain-policy-related editorials and commentaries, particularly in regard to ethical, regulatory, forensic, and other legal issues in pain medicine, and to the education of pain practitioners and researchers.
期刊最新文献
Translation, Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5) in Nepalese Cancer Patients Experiencing Pain. Continuous Adductor Canal Block Compared to Epidural Anesthesia for Total Knee Arthroplasty. Perioperative Pain Observation of Hip Fracture Surgery Patients with Cheek Acupuncture. A Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial Evaluating Opioid-Free versus Opioid-Sparing Analgesia for Orbital Fracture Reconstruction Under General Anesthesia. Effective Dose of Epidural Hydromorphone for Analgesia Following Caesarean Section in Using Modified Dixon Sequential Method.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1