Skip to main content

Assessment of the Quality and Reliability of Information on Nutrition After Bariatric Surgery on YouTube

Obesity Surgery volume 30, pages 4905–4910 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

Background

YouTube™ is a platform that many people, including patients, use to access health information. Recent studies have revealed that videos on YouTube™ are misleading or that medical videos may not contain appropriate information. This study aimed to assess the quality and reliability of videos on nutrition after bariatric surgery.

Materials and Methods

The keywords “after bariatric surgery diet” and “weight loss surgery postop diet” were used, and the first 100 videos for each keyword on YouTube™ were analyzed by considering the source, duration, content, and the number of likes of the video. The popularity of the video was calculated using the video power index (VPI) and view rate. The educational quality of the videos was evaluated using the DISCERN score, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) score, the Global Quality Score (GQS), the usefulness score, and a novel postoperation nutrition score (PONS).

Results

One hundred fourteen patients were included in the study. The mean duration and number of views were 12.51 min and 87,558.46, respectively. The DISCERN score, JAMA score, GQS, and usefulness score of the physicians or dietician-based videos were significantly higher than those of the patient-based videos (p < 0.001). Positive correlations were found between the VPI and view ratio, as well as between the duration and number of likes. Additionally, the DISCERN score was significant correlated with the duration and number of likes. Significantly positive correlations were found between the usefulness score and duration, usefulness score and number of likes, and PONS and duration (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

Informational videos on nutrition after bariatric surgery on YouTube™ are of low quality. Although the videos uploaded by physicians and dieticians have higher quality, only a few are available. Additionally, patients prefer to watch low-quality videos.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Fox S. Health topics; 2011. http://www.pewinternet.org/2011/02/01/health-topics-2 [accessed 12 May 2020].

  2. Erdem H, Sisik A. The reliability of bariatric surgery videos in YouTube platform. Obes Surg. 2018;28(3):712–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cisco Systems Inc. White Paper: Cisco Visual Networking Index; 2015. http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service [accessed 12 May 2020].

  4. Farnan JM, Paro JA, Higa J, et al. The YouTube generation: implications for medical professionalism. Perspect Biol Med. 2008;51(4):517–24. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.0.0048.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ashraf B. Teaching the Google–Eyed YouTube Generation. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE); 2009. p. 2252–2262.

  6. Potomkova J, Mihal V, Schwarz D. Medical education for YouTube generation. E-Learning-engineering. On-job training and interactive teaching. Rijeka: InTech; 2012. p. 157–176.

  7. Barry DS, Marzouk F, Chulak-Oglu K, et al. Anatomy education for the YouTube generation. Anat Sci Educ. 2016;9(1):90–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Erdem MN, Karaca S. Evaluating the accuracy and quality of the information in kyphosis videos shared on YouTube. Spine. 2018;43(22):E1334–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ferhatoglu MF, Kartal A, Ekici U, et al. Evaluation of the reliability, utility, and quality of the information in sleeve gastrectomy videos shared on open access video sharing platform YouTube. Obes Surg. 2019;29(5):1477–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-019-03738-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Celik H, Polat O, Ozcan C, et al. Assessment of the quality and reliability of the information on rotator cuff repair on YouTube. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2020;106(1):31–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Pant S, Deshmukh A, Murugiah K, et al. Assessing the credibility of the “YouTube approach” to health information on acute myocardial infarction. Clin Cardiol. 2012;35(5):281–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gradaschi R, Molinari V, Sukkar SG, et al. Effects of the postoepartive dietetic/behavioral counseling on the weight loss after bariatric surgery. Obes Surg. 2020;30(1):244–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, et al. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999;53(2):105–11.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assur-ing the quality of medical information on the Internet: caveant lector et viewor—let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA. 1997;277:1244–5.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, et al. A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102(9):2070–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lee JS, Seo HS, Hong TH. YouTube as a source of patient information on gallstone disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20(14):4066–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mechanick JI, Apovian C, Brethauer S, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutrition, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of patients undergoing bariatric procedures–2019 update: cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2020;16(2):175–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Desai T, Shariff A, Dhingra V, et al. Is content really king? An objective analysis of the public’s response to medical videos on YouTube. PLoS One. 2013;8(12)

  19. Hungerford DS. Internet access produces misinformed patients: managing the confusion. Orthopedics. 2009;32(9):658–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sechrest RC. The internet and the physician-patient relationship. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:2566–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Altun H, Batman B, Uymaz SD, et al. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy outcomes of 750 patients: a 2.5-year experience at a bariatric center of excellence. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2016;26:145–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Nason GJ, Baker JF, Byrne DP, et al. Scoliosis-specific information on the internet: has the Binformation highway^ led to better information provision? Spine. 2012;37:1364–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Keelan J, Pavri-Garcia V, Tomlinson G, et al. YouTube as a source of information on immunization: a content analysis. JAMA. 2007;298:2482–4.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, et al. Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Informatics J. 2015;21:173–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pathak R, Poudel DR, Karmacharya P, et al. YouTube as a source of information on Ebola virus disease. N Am J Med Sci. 2015;7:306–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Akgun T, Karabay CY, Kocabay G, et al. Learning electrocardiogram on YouTube: how useful is it? J Electrocardiol. 2014;47:113–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Nason GJ, Kelly P, Kelly ME, et al. YouTube as an educational tool regarding male urethral catheterization. Scand J Urol. 2015;49:189–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Starman JS, Gettys FK, Capo JA, et al. Quality and content of Internet-based information for ten common orthopaedic sports medicine diagnoses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92:1612–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bruce-Brand RA, Baker JF, Byrne DP, et al. Assessment of the quality and content of information on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on the internet. Arthroscopy. 2013;29:1095–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Biggs TC, Bird JH, Harries PG, et al. YouTube as a source of information on rhinosinusitis: the good, the bad and the ugly. J Laryngol Otol. 2013;127:749–54.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Health Sciences Faculty, Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Istanbul Kültür University, Bahcelievler, 34191, Istanbul, Turkey

    Nazlı Batar

  2. Health Sciences Institute, İstanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Seda Kermen

  3. Health Sciences Faculty, Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Fenerbahçe University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Sezen Sevdin

  4. Health Sciences Faculty, Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Nida Yıldız

  5. Health Sciences Faculty, Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Duygu Güçlü

Authors
  1. Nazlı Batar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Seda Kermen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sezen Sevdin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nida Yıldız
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Duygu Güçlü
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nazlı Batar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent Statement

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Batar, N., Kermen, S., Sevdin, S. et al. Assessment of the Quality and Reliability of Information on Nutrition After Bariatric Surgery on YouTube. OBES SURG 30, 4905–4910 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-020-05015-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-020-05015-z

Keywords

  • Internet
  • YouTube
  • After bariatric surgery
  • Patient education
  • Information
  • Quality video