Advertisement

Journal of Cancer Education

, Volume 30, Issue 4, pp 699–703 | Cite as

Characteristics of YouTube™ Videos Related to Mammography

  • Corey H. Basch
  • Grace Clarke Hillyer
  • Zerlina L. MacDonald
  • Rachel Reeves
  • Charles E. Basch
Article

Abstract

With a monthly total of more than one billion unique visitors, YouTube™ is one of the Internet’s most visited websites and contributes to the growing amount of health-related information on the Internet. The purpose of this study was to analyze coverage of mammography screening in popular YouTube™ videos. A total of 173 videos were included in the analysis. Compared with professionally created videos, consumer-created videos had a significantly greater number of comments (>9 comments 38.0 % for consumer vs. 11.8 % for professional videos, p = < 0.001). Videos created by professionals more often portrayed general mammography information (97.1 vs. 88.7 %) compared to those created by consumers. The vast majority of videos presented general information (93.6 %) related to mammography, and almost two thirds addressed preparing for the test. Less than 20 % dealt with other types of examinations. Approximately 30 % discussed pain associated with the examination (35.3 %) and addressed issues of anxiety (32.4 %) and fear (29.5 %). Nearly half of the videos presented information about the test results (46.2 %). Over 25 % covered medical or family history. The majority did not pertain to a specific age group. Future research should focus on analyzing the accuracy of the information in the videos.

Keywords

Breast cancer Mammography Screening YouTube™ Social media 

References

  1. 1.
    American Cancer Society (2014) Cancer facts & figures 2014. Atlanta, American Cancer Institute. http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@research/documents/webcontent/acspc-042151.pdf Accessed 6 Sept 2014
  2. 2.
    National Cancer Institute (2014) SEER stat fact sheet: breast cancer. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html Accessed 6 Sept 2014
  3. 3.
    Independent U. K. Panel on Breast Cancer Screening (2012) The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet 380(9855):1778–1786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A, et al. (2009). Screening for breast cancer: systematic evidence review update for the US preventive services task force. Rockville MDGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Paci E, Euroscreen Working Group (2012) Summary of the evidence of breast cancer service screening outcomes in Europe and first estimate of the benefit and harm balance sheet. J Med Screen 19(Suppl 1):5–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (2009) Screening for breast cancer using film mammography clinical summary of 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf09/breastcancer/brcansum.pdf Accessed 6 Sept 2014
  7. 7.
    American Cancer Society (2013) Breast cancer facts & figures 2013–2014. American Cancer Institute, AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    U.S. Preventative Services Task Force (2009) Screening for breast cancer: recommendation statement. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf09/breastcancer/brcanrs.htm Accessed 6 Sept 2014
  9. 9.
    Fox S (2011) Pew research Internet project. The social life of health information. Retrieved from: http://www.pewinternet.org/2011/05/12/the-social-life-of-health-information-2011/
  10. 10.
    Robertson-Lang L, Major S, Hemming H (2011) An exploration of search patterns and credibility issues among older adults seeking online health information. Can J Aging 30(4):631–645CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    YouTube Statistics (n.d.). YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/yt/press/statistics.html Accessed 6 Sept 2014
  12. 12.
    Pew Research Journalism Project. (2012) YouTube and News. http://www.journalism.org/2012/07/16/youtube-news/ Accessed 6 Sept 2014
  13. 13.
    Fernando J (2011) The role of non-profits in the mammogram debate. Yale J Biol Med 84(1):35–38PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions. (2013). Reliable cancer information on the Internet. www.hopkinsmedicine.org/jhbmc/library Accessed 6 Sept 2014
  15. 15.
    Nilsson-Ihrfelt E, Fjällskog M, Blomqvist C, Ahlgren J, Edlund P, Hansen J, Andersson G (2004) Breast cancer on the Internet: the quality of Swedish breast cancer websites. Breast 13(5):376–382CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Corey H. Basch
    • 1
  • Grace Clarke Hillyer
    • 2
  • Zerlina L. MacDonald
    • 1
  • Rachel Reeves
    • 1
  • Charles E. Basch
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Public HealthWilliam Paterson UniversityWayneUSA
  2. 2.Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public HealthColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.Department of Health and Behavior Studies, Teachers CollegeColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations